astksh review

[Christopher Faylor]

On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:00:18PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>While I concede your point about the gift horse, I was NOT trying to get
>>Karsten to change any of the build procedures by my comment, or even
>>request that the configure script be augmented (a wistful comment was
>>made, and I apologize if I stepped on people's toes).
>
>My comments were not addressed (soley) to you.  There were a number of 
>rather petulant "why don't you do it THIS way" comments concerning 
>ast-ksh.  Yours was the one lucky enough to take out my last, weakened, 
>nerve -- so you got both barrels.
>
>But it was loaded with birdshot, so the marks should fade in a few days. :-)

Just wanted to weigh in that I vote in favor of astksh (this is actually sort
of a given since I've been asking for it for a while).  It's nice that there
is a configure wrapper but, even if there weren't, there's no reason that
we shouldn't be able to use whatever configuration is present.  No one is
complaining about perl which, AFAIK, still uses Larry Wall's Configure system
(the name of which escapes me right now -- metaconfig maybe?).

cg no birdshot on me f