Re: proposal to fork the build-tools projects

[Peter Eisentraut]

Tom Lord writes:

> But to _extend_ with new features or simpler approaches: that's where,
> for example, depending on GNU Make can make a world of difference.

So you're talking about Automake.  I agree, Automake's attempts at
portability are nuts.  But for the bootstrap packages you wouldn't even
need a "bootstrap branch" of Automake: you can just supply a shell script
that issues the build commands.

But what were your thoughts on Autoconf?  Autoconf isn't going to benefit
greatly from assuming, say, a strict POSIX environment.  You could use
shell functions, but I don't see how that would make anything easier.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   address@hidden