On Saturday, July 31, 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Here's a crazy idea: how about if automake optionally > output an input file suitable for nmake (after configure > substitution)? Is that even feasible? (I'd guess so) > Maybe if we have contents conditional on 'make' or 'nmake' > output? Would that even help anybody? (no idea)
I don't think this would help that many people. If someone is running autotools (or even a generated configure script) on windows, I think we can assume they've either got cygwin or msys which implies access to make. If they've got make I can't see why they'd need to use nmake. > Or is a better alternative to follow the path we have > taken with Libtool (finally getting MSVC support in) also > in Automake, with Peter's patches and more? I like this approach much better. All the hand-maintained versions of cccl would finally disappear. -DB
