From: bill_kempf (williamkempf_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 13:08:36
--- In boost_at_y..., "braden_mcdaniel" <braden_at_e...> wrote:
> --- In boost_at_y..., "bill_kempf" <williamkempf_at_h...> wrote:
> > Replacing the shell with perl or python would be great for me
> > interests outside of work), but still wouldn't allow me to use
> > autotools in my work environment. :(
> So what approach to the problem autoconf addresses *would* work in
> your environment?
One that doesn't require an invasive installation, meaning one that
doesn't modify my operating system at all.
> > And nearly anything would be better then m4.
> "Nearly anything" won't necessarily accomplish what m4 accomplishes.
> What would be some viable alternatives?
Huh? m4 is just a scripting language that does macro expansion.
Perl could have been used instead (and actually was considered). Or
python. Heck, even Java would work for this even though Java isn't a
> > > Boost.Thread is acutally what I'm primarily interested in using.
> > Tell me what I can do (besides write an autoconf script, which I
> > can't do) to help you out here and I'll be very glad to do it.
> Installation must be as simple as "./configure;make;make install".
> doesn't have to be those commands exactly, but that spirit of
> simplicity must be intact. If Boost can get there with Jam, that's
> fine by me.
I'm sure that eventually we will (though not necessarily just with
Jam). However, that time is too distant to be of interest to you.
What I really meant was that I can provide help/information on how
you can write the scripts you need to accomplish your goals. You
could then contribute this to the Boost effort for others.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk