httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ben Laurie <...@gonzo.ben.algroup.co.uk>
Subject Re: autoconf
Date Fri, 27 Jun 1997 22:03:24 GMT
Dean Gaudet wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > +1 on using autoconf for 2.0.
> 
> I'd really like to re-open the autoconf can of worms and find out why
> there is a dislike of it.  I've only had successes with it when I use it,
> my program worked on platforms I hadn't seen without any changes.  I just
> followed the autoconf docs and used every macro they suggested.  So you
> can count me as +1 for autoconf. 

I'll restate my objections to autoconf:

1. What we've got mostly works (this is a new objection ;-)

2. Changing what autoconf does requires an understanding of the gadget that
generates the scripts, whereas changing what we do only requires understanding
shell and .h - far more common skills.

3. Failing 2, it is next to impossible to fix autoconf scripts when broken.

4. On minority OSes, autoconf scripts are often severely broken.

Cheers,

Ben.

-- 
Ben Laurie                Phone: +44 (181) 994 6435  Email: ben@algroup.co.uk
Freelance Consultant and  Fax:   +44 (181) 994 6472
Technical Director        URL: http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL
A.L. Digital Ltd,         Apache Group member (http://www.apache.org)
London, England.          Apache-SSL author

Mime
View raw message