This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: autotools transition report: need a flag day
- From: Phil Edwards <phil at jaj dot com>
- To: Loren James Rittle <rittle at latour dot rsch dot comm dot mot dot com>
- Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:00:31 -0400
- Subject: Re: autotools transition report: need a flag day
- References: <mailman.179.1060046777.1684.gnu-libstdcpp@lists.nsr.labs.mot.com> <200308050254.h752sRNX078890@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com>
On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 09:54:27PM -0500, Loren James Rittle wrote:
>
> Random comment: They sure are slower than the old autotools...
Tell me about it. :-(
> [1] Well, one of us has a patched copy of GNU autoconf-2.57 or other
> environment introduced randomness (looks "mostly harmless"):
Hadn't noticed that. That would be Debian's patched version. (The RedHat
machine here has become a distributed system -- the drives are stacked
against the far wall, the mainboard is sitting in another room, the case
is underneath this table, etc -- or I would have tried it there too and
seen something.) Good catch. I agree it should be harmless.
Phil
--
Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it.
- Brian W. Kernighan