Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 2584 invoked by uid 6000); 5 Feb 1998 21:45:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 2561 invoked from network); 5 Feb 1998 21:44:58 -0000 Received: from eastwood.aldigital.algroup.co.uk (194.128.162.193) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 5 Feb 1998 21:44:58 -0000 Received: from freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk (freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk [193.133.15.6]) by eastwood.aldigital.algroup.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA00671 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:44:09 GMT Received: from algroup.co.uk (naughty.ben.algroup.co.uk [193.133.15.107]) by freeby.ben.algroup.co.uk (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA24090 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 1998 21:44:03 GMT Message-ID: <34DA328C.A0241F84@algroup.co.uk> Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 21:43:40 +0000 From: Ben Laurie Organization: A.L. Digital Ltd. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: new-httpd@apache.org Subject: Re: apache/linux modules References: <199802050412.XAA22688@devsys.jaguNET.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Jim Jagielski wrote: > > This is my last post as well. > > Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > > > Jim, I would submit that you are writing without a clue on this issue. > > You don't know squat about how automake/autoconf works, and yet you are > > willing to compare it to Configure as if you do. I can't force you to > > go out and learn how it works, but I can tell you what I know from using > > it on another project for more than a year now. When you stop spouting > > nonsense based on nothing other than a poorly grounded imagination, > > I'll start listening to your opinion of autoconf as if it mattered. > > > > Please reread my messages... My opinion has been totally, 100% based > on actual, real-world experience with autoconf/configure. Nope, > I don't know the nitty-gritty details on how every line of code > works nor do I want to, nor do I require that knowledge to have > an opinion. Instead, I have had countless times when ./configure > has caused me more hassle and headache than a simple commented > "configuration" file would have. This is fact. I've mentioned this > several times. Either you haven't bothered reading what I've said, > in which case I certainly can't force you to, or you have > chosen to bolster your argument by wrapping my arguments in lies > and falsehoods. Either way, it doesn't hold water. I would submit > that you don't have a clue what I've been saying, and the above > statements clearly show that. Seems to me that the divide here is that Roy is talking about what can be done with autoconf/automake, and you are talking about what your experience is with what people have done with it. I'm interested to know whether you have come across _any_ autoconf based programs that actually do work out of the box, or whether you universally have problems? Cheers, Ben. -- Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686|Apache Group member Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org and Technical Director|Email: ben@algroup.co.uk |Apache-SSL author A.L. Digital Ltd, |http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache