Re: Possible next releases of CTWM >4.1.x without use of CMAKE ?

On Thu 11 May 2017 at 20:51:19 +0200, spartrekus spartrekus wrote:
> , I
> have a strong believe that simple way for compiling are likely the best
> option to go.

> ./configure

Have you ever looked at the horrible monstrosities that are in those
configure script? They are so horrible you cannot write them by hand and
need several horrible multi-phase macro-expanding tools. I have worked
with the GNU autotools out of necessity, and I can't say I'm a big fan.

Cheers,
-Olaf.
-- 
___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert  -- Wayland: Those who don't understand X
\X/ rhialto/at/xs4all.nl    -- are condemned to reinvent it. Poorly.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZFit0AAoJEJmJxkVhw/vTE4AH/11GsXTDi6aedk9aPnVmy8xL
TtrObHJV1WKgCxLz/esVixgsmNEoEAXatyEQByMljQGRRfgXpohGfWMiX4MDTgRl
DPsfs0Xh66K49zmWYtqcwqf/Na5tLJ7dz+IMytIVX9rjQk3hldGludeNSB44LP8g
AzT4CaEYX6zhQe9Dj8gGfAKJl6PdVSSq7CWTffr6zeA/udTmDYSAHm6bYDiqI3nH
EHfqBUuP1cNfZDEOXw74wX+iEulQM3mEphflsQTY/0LQuediYhPP53AP2FVRLkkR
OziBDv6n1EGOYTTCy14X18nal61uls1AkICTLLqrKqyVIQ/KF4yoq5JzAYGA4Ck=
=M4oy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----