From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from postman.osf.org ([130.105.1.152]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <24659>; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 18:58:44 -0500
Received: from sulphur.osf.org (sulphur.osf.org [130.105.1.123]) by postman.osf.org (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA07713; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 12:30:11 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from rsalz@localhost) by sulphur.osf.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA01905; Wed, 2 Apr 1997 12:30:09 -0500 (EST)
Date:	Wed, 2 Apr 1997 12:30:09 -0500
From:	Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
Message-Id: <199704021730.MAA01905@sulphur.osf.org>
To:	bengtk@damek.kth.se, byron@netapp.com, rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu
Subject: Re: autoconfig

>  Posix feels more "professional" than autoconfig. Perhaps I'm just very vain.

It's not vain, just very silly.

Until one standard is 100% of the "marketplace" that you wish to serve,
then leveraging well-understood, succesful, tools like FSF's autoconf
are the way to go.

This is my experience based on having developed and released several
software packages to the net at large.
	/r$