"Eric J. Schwertfeger" wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > The only difference between "./configure" and ". ./configure"
> > is that the latter works even if ./configure has no executable permissions
> > set. So maybe it's a permissicon problem, it certainly has nothing to do
> > with having . in $PATH or your choice of shells.
>
Ehm. ". ./configure" was a typo. I meant ". ./ac_thread.sh".
>
> Not exactly important, but a minor nit. "sh ./configure" would be
> preferable to ". ./configure:", no? ". ./configure" could change the
> environment or current working directory, whereas the first wouldn't have
> that potential problem.
Changing vars in the environment is the main purpose of ac_thread.sh.
Also, if you are working on a Solaris system with a broken "/bin/sh" you'd
prefer "${CONFIG_SHELL-/bin/sh} ./configure"
(configure already does it this way for recursive calls).
Ciao
Andreas
