The problem was that autoconf didn't configure nor test conformity: it passed along without warning that <br>I was missing some important thread crap that changed betwixt versions it seems. So for the half<br>our conformity test/configuration, it still wouldn't actually tell me what was really missing, which was
<br>fun because it kept passing the thread test sections... <br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/8/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Charles Forsyth</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:forsyth@terzarima.net">forsyth@terzarima.net
</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">&gt; Well, for all the crap that autoconf addes, it still couldn't tell what was
<br>&gt; wrong when building glibc. I had to build a tiny program to check out what<br>&gt; was really happening...<br><br>i am surprised that many people still think that `autoconf' is short for `autoconfigure'<br>when obviously it means `autoconformity': it ensures that your system
<br>conforms to the one system on which the software will compile and run without fuss.<br>it does that by breaking in increasingly obscure ways until you agree to conform.<br>or else.<br><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>Nietzsche's first step is to accept what he knows. Atheism for him goes without saying and is &quot;contructive and<br>radical&quot;. Nietzsche's supreme vocation, so he says, is to provoke a kind of crisis and a final decision about the
<br>problem of atheism. The world continues on its course at random and there is nothing final about it. Thus God <br>is useless, since He wants nothing in particular. If he wanted something -- and here we recognize the traditional
<br>forumlation of the problem of evil -- He would have to assume responsiblity for &quot;a sum total of pain and inconsistency<br>which would debase the entire value of being born.&quot;<br> -- Albert Camus, L'Homme révolté