Status of libtool 2.2.X?

[Kevin Kofler]

Karel Zak wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 04, 2008 at 02:40:05PM -0600, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> needing only CMake vs. needing sh, sed, awk, etc is fewer dependencies.
> 
>  "The Right Tool For The Job" ...

That's kinda the point...

>  autotools use already implemented tools (POSIX sed, awk, sh, ..)

Tools which are really not intended to be used the way the autotools do.
Just look at all the glitches and incompatibilities the extremely complex
configure scripts uncover in various implementations (just try to read a
configure script and watch how often terms like "bug in ...", "work around"
etc. are used in comments - and that's where there _are_ comments). The
autotools are abusing shell scripts for things which should be done by real
programs (and that's also why they are so slow).

>  rather than duplicate functionality & code.

CMake doesn't duplicate anything, it just uses C++ rather than shell as its
language. The right tool for the job. :-)

The autotools are the ones which duplicate functionality by copying the same
scripts and script snippets over and over to every single program.

>  The dependences are price that we pay for this excellent UNIX idea.

There you say it: "UNIX idea" - i.e. non-portable. Not all the world is
POSIX (even if we can all wish it was).

        Kevin Kofler