Dear diary, on Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 02:20:41AM CEST, I got a letter where Junio C Hamano <junkio@xxxxxxx> said that... > > I hope the Autoconf based configure is on its way to git, but I don't > > see in in the "pu" branch yet. I'm not very keen about reinventing > > Autoconf and hacking a hand-made configure script. > > OK, you half-convinced me. The other half came from a recent > series of patches to try using 'which' to detect executables, > which is another common mistake handcrafted configure script > makes, which autoconf people have solved for us long time ago. Good! In fact, I have been a moderate autoconf fan and originally I have meant the hand-crafted ./configure script partially just as a tease and a nominal competitor for the autoconf one, so that we would for sure got _some_ autoconfiguration mechanism (which is what I care about). I have to admit that I have grown somewhat attached to my script over time and I like it a lot more than the autoconf thing personally, but then again I had no idea that we actually want to support such systems like those with broken which... -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise. Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html