Per Jessen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dimitri Maziuk wrote: > >>> Alright, then perhaps not autoconf itself, but the general "edit the >>> header file" configuration method is a little dated, so some kind of >>> assisted config tool would come in handy. >> >> My take on it, if one can't edit the defines in Makefile/header file, >> then one probably won't be able to create a usable analog config file >> either. Or apache config file -- so that person probably shouldn't >> try to run a webserver anyway. > > autoconf is used by 99.9% of the software I use. That alone seems to > be a strong indication of its distinct advantages over hand-editing a > pile of header files. > > If it was up to me, analog-7.0 would be autoconf'ed.
What exactly is it that you need to edit in Analog header files? Describing anlghead.h as "a pile of header files" sounds like sophistry to me. Aengus +------------------------------------------------------------------------ | TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this list: | http://lists.meer.net/mailman/listinfo/analog-help | | Analog Documentation: http://analog.cx/docs/Readme.html | List archives: http://www.analog.cx/docs/mailing.html#listarchives | Usenet version: news://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.analog.general +------------------------------------------------------------------------
