From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: erik quanstrom Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:10:43 -0400 To: 9fans@9fans.net Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <636733be-5009-4311-97ab-dc81634dbd06@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.co> References: <06a0be10-d05e-47f4-bebf-c9d9512de2b8@q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com> <636733be-5009-4311-97ab-dc81634dbd06@p15g2000vbl.googlegroups.co> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [9fans] Two suggestions for ape (was: egrep for Plan9) Topicbox-Message-UUID: 90647328-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > The problem is, everyone who generates configure by this version (or > some range of versions) of autoconf would run into this because this > is inserted in the configure's initialization code without any feature > tests requested by configure.ac lots of discussion of autoconf at the gsoc mentor's summit. the general consensus is that getting autoconf to work correctly just doesn't pay unless your os is really similar to linux and there's no cross compiling going on. i think it's interesting to note that the way p9p/9vx accomplish portability doesn't result with very little platform-specific code and build bits while remaining more more flexable. did i mention that it's easy to understand as well? - erik