On Sun, 2008-03-16 at 15:40 +0100, Dirk wrote: > My point is that autoconf is such a bloated, self-important, > wet-script-kiddie-dream that is DOESN'T make the build process > easier... > > It rather encourages people to write their own config scripts... > > So the whole thing has lost its meaning... I'm not sure why I'm bothering to reply when you obviously don't really want help, you just want to spout your own opinions and froth at the mouth to make yourself feel better at the expense of others. I'll just say two things: first, if you think "autoconf" is named that because it's automatic for the MAINTAINER, then you've COMPLETELY missed the point. Here's a hint: it's not about you, it's about your users. Second, if you think you can write your own "config script" that will be portable to even a small fraction of the systems that an autoconfiscated package is, then by all means, have at it. Many people have made the same hysterical claims you have, and yet strangely enough, no one has actually _produced_ anything better. Odd. And, if you don't care about your project being portable, then indeed: why are you even bothering with autoconf? Cheers. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <psmith@xxxxxxx> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.mad-scientist.us "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
