[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: autoconf 3.0?

From: Bruce Korb
Subject: Re: autoconf 3.0?
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:51:55 -0700

Alex Hornby wrote:

> Just to play devils advocate for a moment - wasn't a "system state" the
> whole problem with Imake?
> I remember using it, and the chances of a vendor's (think Sun, HP or
> Digital here) Imake settings being correct was approximately zero :)

It's true that different settings of PATH et al. will effect the outcome
of the probes.  I would argue that someone with lots of different PATH
settings that they would want to install to would require lots of
different prefix directories that they would be installing into.
The worst case scenario would be having to install autoconf-setup
to a temporary directory (placed at the head of the PATH list),
then installing the package of interest.  That's almost as bad as
fretting over shells that do not have functions.  :-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]