On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 06:33:34PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote: > > Can somebody remind me why it is that APR-util has 'buildconf.sh' and APR > and Apache have just plain 'buildconf'? ISTR that we were going to > migrate to 'buildconf.sh' and that it just only got done half-way. Is > that right?
It's a shell script, meant for execution. Thus, the .sh extension. Many projects use "autogen.sh", but the Apache projects don't follow that tradition. buildconf(.sh) is the name/term we use. The .sh extension clues in various apps that the thing is a script. Emacs recognizes it, file managers can recognize it, etc. And yes, the problem is due to "done half-way" Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
