On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:30 AM, Jan Engelhardt <jeng...@inai.de> wrote: > > On Thursday 2013-06-20 20:55, Paul Moore wrote: >> >>A perfectly valid point. As I've mentioned in the past, I'm not opposed to >>using the autotools at some point in the future, I'm just not there yet. > > In fact, you should be able to have both the normal and the AM makefiles > in the tree. Then everyone and you would benefit :) >
What would be the problem that adding autotools will solve? I'm personally happy with the simplicity of the current buildsystem. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ libseccomp-discuss mailing list libseccomp-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libseccomp-discuss
