[linux-elitists] Is this not the funniest documentation you ever read?

Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
Mon Oct 20 05:54:49 PDT 2008

On Thursday 02 October 2008, Teh Entar-Nick wrote:
> Ruben Safir:
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#Writing-Autocon
> >f-Input
> >
> > > The problem Autoconf addresses is that the world is a mess. After
> > > all,....
> The sad thing is that the world is nowhere near as messy as the one
> Autoconf was designed for.  We no longer need a system that will spit
> out build scripts that work on Apollo workstations, Ultrix, and 2.11BSD.
> We can now at *least* count on POSIX shells being available, and awk,
> and so on.
> Unfortunately, all proposed replacements have either been vapor or
> crack.  

I've been very happy with CMake ( http://www.cmake.org/ ) so far. It's not 
vapourware because it's already at version 2.6.2 and is very usable. And from 
my impression, it's not "crack" because it works very well.

Here are links to my reviews on CMake:

* http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il/msg53026.html

* http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/4979

* http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/hackers-il/message/4983

> We're stuck with m4 macros that spit out 
> lowest-fucking-ever-common-denominator bourne shell subsets.

Thank God we no longer are.


	Shlomi Fish

Shlomi Fish       http://www.shlomifish.org/
Why I Love Perl - http://xrl.us/bjn88

Shlomi, so what are you working on? Working on a new wiki about unit testing 
fortunes in freecell? -- Ran Eilam

More information about the linux-elitists mailing list