> -----Original Message----- > From: 9fans-boun...@9fans.net [mailto:9fans-boun...@9fans.net] On Behalf Of > lu...@proxima.alt.za > Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 11:58 PM > To: 9fans@9fans.net > Subject: Re: [9fans] (no subject) > > >> Agreed wholeheartedly. Thing is, It's autoconf that needs careful > >> redesign: > > > > I don't see any need for autoconf. As one wise person put it to me, > > "things like configure and autoconf just mean you don't know how to > > write portable code". > > > Again, agreed, but reality out there suggests many others are still > believers, no matter how misguided. We were discussing making > available Open Source ports...
What your discussing is adding massive complexity. I would prefer to not have the tools and programs, and retain simplicity, rather than add outlandish complexity. > > > I still like to point people at plan 9 ports as an example of a > > complex system that gets by without this *conf* nonsense. > > It falls over just enough to be attacked. Otherwise, p9p source would have > been ported back to Plan 9 in its entirety. It's a shame, > really, and with some work it could be fixed, but some of that work is design > work. > > ++L > > PS: I realise that I'm proposing two nearly orthogonal objectives, sorry that > I didn't clarify that sooner.
