This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: astksh review
There is no problem with the regular configure/make (i.e.,
default configuration of the package). However, if I wanted to, say,
twiddle with the source and turn some features on/off, or
even, say, insert debug printouts for some bug that manifests
running shell scripts, it would be much easier to do so with
pdksh -- I
think I understand most of the source (haven't looked at it
in a while).
As an aside, it would be great if certain features/defines in the code
were turned on/off with configure's "--enable-*"/"--disable-*" options
(not sure if they are now, sounds like they aren't).
People, let me introduce you to a "gift horse." Please stop inspecting
Karsten and others have done a lot of work to accomodate the cygwin
packaging standard. It is *extremely* disrepectful for us (the cygwin
community, as it were) to then insist on *internal* changes to the
e.g. "Stop using nmake and this really confusing Makefile system. Use
That is NOT helpful -- nor does it belong on this list. We're talking
about packaging ast-ksh so that it can be installed on cygwin using
setup, and conform to our packaging rules.
Those rules say nothing about requiring autoconf. There's a tacit
assumption that cygwin packages should be buildable on a cygwin system
without additional, non-official cygwin packages -- but no requirement
that any *particular* cygwin tool (like autoconf) be used. (ast-ksh
satisfies the build-on-stock-cygwin "rule", but not the
ast-ksh uses a Makefile-driven build system. It is not autoconfed. It
never will be autoconfed. And if it WERE to be autoconfed, that
discussion would belong over on the ast-ksh mailing list, because you're
talking about massive overall changes to the upstream package, not
simply cygwin-specific porting tweaks.
(FWIW, I vote "yes" on this package, as is)