Re: autotools alternatives, is anybody using autosetup?

[David Given <dg@...>]

Aleksey Cheusov wrote:
[...]
> In the middle 90th I was a Windows user, so, I can feel the pain.
> But I believe that UNIX tools ported to Windows (cygwin and interix)
> gives Windows developers A LOT of power. So, it makes sense for them
> to learn UNIX tools once and use them for years. IMHO mingw is not relevant.

We recently switched our development system from Cygwin to Mingw because
Cygwin was becoming far too much of a PITA to use --- recent versions
get on *really* badly with having more than one version of Cygwin
installed at a time, or calling out to non-Cygwin command line tools
from Cygwin, or calling in to Cygwin command line tools from non Cygwin...

Mingw tries much less hard than Cygwin to be Unix-like, which makes it
much simpler and easier to understand, and vastly easier to deploy in a
turnkey environment which may need to coexist with random other tools
the user may have deployed. And the licensing is vastly, vastly easier
and cheaper.

(GNU make on Windows is still a dead loss, though; it can't cope with
targets containing colons, such as any Windows-style path...)

-- 
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ─────
│ "Parents let children ride bicycles on the street. But parents do not
│ allow children to hear vulgar words. Therefore we can deduce that
│ cursing is more dangerous than being hit by a car." --- Scott Adams

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature