From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4B9577E9.3000203@orcasystems.com>
Date: Mon,  8 Mar 2010 14:19:21 -0800
From: James Tomaschke <james@orcasystems.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20091107)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
References: <5e7c9d4a3be87f517338922303722d69@proxima.alt.za>
In-Reply-To: <5e7c9d4a3be87f517338922303722d69@proxima.alt.za>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] (no subject)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e52a85be-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

lucio@proxima.alt.za wrote:
> That's simple pragmatism.  Using Plan 9 without some of the Open
> Source stuff is hard at least for some of us.  And there just aren't
> enough Plan 9 developers to produce alternatives.  Considering the
> number of useful (if poorly implemented) Open Source tools out there,
> I'm sure I'm not being absurd.

What tools do you have in mind?

This can be true for useful projects but it is not the case with
Autotools, because it is properly implemented as a useless tool.

If they wrote their own Makefile.in you can use that or Makefile.am to
create a mkfile fairly quickly.

There's no need to worry about path searching because of Plan 9
filespace unions.

Testing for missing headers/libraries is also pointless as compiling
will tell you this.

Autotools will not generate portable code, it can only inject code that
the author wrote a condition for.

effort > reward ergo GNU Not Useful