Brandon J Van Every <vanevery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Yes, compiling small test probes is valid on Windows. The programming > tools aren't an alien species, they just have GUI front ends and > different different directory names and compiler command flags and so > forth. Cosmetic differences, at least at the level of simple test > probes. Especially, given that most projects people would consider > porting are already somewhat portable by design. Well, in that case I think the basic idea is valid. My intuition is that a tool based on POSIX / Unix shell scripting isn't a particularly natural fit to a Windows environment, so there remains that implementation problem (it's pretty unlikely that Autoconf will ever move away from using Unix shell as its output language, and it's more Unix shell than POSIX shell given the amount of catering to odd shells that goes on). But if that and the compiler arguments issue could be overcome, there isn't any inherent technical reason that I can think of why Autoconf wouldn't work. -- Russ Allbery (rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
