3 Nov
2008
3 Nov
'08
4:23 p.m.
on Mon Nov 03 2008, Vladimir Prus <vladimir-AT-codesourcery.com> wrote:
In other words, the statement that folks want "configure; make; make install" is not accurate -- they also assume autoconf + automake. Providing configure actually makes a false impression, and whereas we can counter this impression by making configure produce big warnings that it's not real configure, we can just as well use different name.
I find most of your arguments convincing. The only thing I wonder about is discoverability. If you call it configure, *nix people know where to start. If you call it something else, I guess you still have a README.txt and an INSTALL.txt, so maybe it doesn't matter. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com