Re: LYNX-DEV Makefile support

[Foteos Macrides]

address@hidden (Michael Sokolov) wrote:
>[...]
>   I fully understand your arguments that the autoconfigure script gives
>users a lot of benefit. Please understand that I'm not proposing to throw
>it out. I only propose to GIVE THE USERS A CHOICE. Remember: if it ain't
>broke, don't fix it. If the static Makefile is there, keep it there.

        The static Makefile is geared to the #ifdef'ing design of the
original libwwws, which assume functionality, normally, and regulate
it's use via NO_foo symbols.  The autoconfers are converting the code
to use the GNU (essentially, inverse) logic (HAVE_foo symbols).  Your
assumption that "the static Makefile is there" will not apply when the
current development code develops into a formal release, unless someone
spends considerable "spare time" co-modifying the static Makefile.  The
whole point of the autoconf is to avoid less than ideal static targets,
so it's unlikely anyone will waste his or her "spare time" doing that.
The whole tone of this thread seems geared toward the concept of a
vendor "shipping" Lynx.  There is no vendor, nor any shipping.  There
are only people doing each other "favors" in their "spare time".

                                Fote

=========================================================================
 Foteos Macrides            Worcester Foundation for Biomedical Research
 address@hidden         222 Maple Avenue, Shrewsbury, MA 01545
=========================================================================
;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;