From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from techfac.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de ([129.70.1.2]) by archone.tamu.edu with SMTP id <45329>; Fri, 14 Feb 1992 14:27:16 -0600
Received: from dahlie.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE by techfac.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de (5.65+bind 1.7+ida 1.4.2/tp.29.0890)
	id AA28059; Fri, 14 Feb 92 21:27:00 +0100
Received: by dahlie.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de (4.1/tp.29.0890)
	id AA05683; Fri, 14 Feb 92 21:26:59 +0100
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1992 14:26:59 -0600
From: malte@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Message-Id: <9202142026.AA05683@dahlie.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de>
To: rc@archone.tamu.edu
Subject: to imake or not to imake

I don't want to start any religious wars, but imake -once set up correctly-
usually shortens installation procedures to "imkmf; make install", especially
if the sources are as portable as rc is.
Before stating that imake doesn't work, one should have a look at imake
coming from Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center ( the original )
or the X11R5 thing.
For those who are not running imake, a Makefile can be included in the
distribution, ready to be hacked manually.

Of course, it is not worth installing imake just to configure rc.

Malte.