From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 May 2006 13:08:58 -0700 From: "Micah Stetson" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] impressive In-Reply-To: <090054c961a5151cabe817d1a3f724d6@terzarima.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <283f5df10605080804y56b0124ence29c4bd6cfbc3cb@mail.gmail.com> <090054c961a5151cabe817d1a3f724d6@terzarima.net> Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4f619922-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 > i am surprised that many people still think that `autoconf' is short for > `autoconfigure' when obviously it means `autoconformity': it ensures that Boy I learn something new from this list all the time. A few weeks ago, I though autoconf had no legitimate purpose. Now I know that it's a GNU/Linux advocacy tool with the added benefit of making people feel good about backwards-incompatible library API changes. Thank you! Micah