apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mo DeJong <mdej...@cygnus.com>
Subject Re: Could buildconf be renamed to autogen.sh?
Date Thu, 14 Dec 2000 18:56:23 GMT
> > I agree with RTFM! as much the next guy, but it seems
> > like users might be better off if we renamed
> > the buildconf file to autogen.sh. Lots of
> > other projects use a script named autogen.sh.
> > I am not sure it is a "standard", but why
> > be different for no reason?
>     And as you point out in a later email, the behaviour of the
>     various autogen.sh is different in each project.
>     It is not a standard, hence your proposal is flawed.
>     - Sascha

I guess I don't follow your logic there. So, since someone
else does it incorrectly, the whole concept must be flawed
from the get go? Why exactly is it "better" for apr
to use a custom name for the bootstrap scrip?

I suggest you go download the source code to gcc and take
a look at the toplevel configure.in file. Does it change
your mind about using a configure.in in apr?

>     May I answer this with a quote of the famous Greg Stein:
>         "There is a README.dev in the top level of APR. That is
>          enough.
>         "Not our fault if people don't read the README.
>     - Sascha

Lets face it, people do not read the README.

Mo DeJong
Red Hat Inc

View raw message