On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 16:07, Daniel Stenberg wrote:
> I'm not sure this makes much difference. Also, is -i really portable on all
> flavours of make?

We use make -i and it seems to work everywhere. On visual studio we do
tricks though.

> That's a good idea, but since we already have the full configure output its
> not adding a lot. It will of course be better suited for machine parsing so
> this is a good thing to add.

I like config.h better, because it is more compact.

> I really don't see 50-100K per mail as a big problem yet! ;-) Also, I plan on
> keeping only the last N days of logs around.

We have 100GB disk and it keeps about a year of logs.

> Nice. Do you usually get a failure on test case 29 or was that just an
> occational slip?

I run it again and it passed.

> I noticed this when I updated the /auto page, which isn't being updated
> automaticly just yet.
> Many thanks for your feedback!

I was trying to do on our HP, but no autoconf and automake there...
Could you commit configure in CVS for platforms without auto*?

                        Andy

-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Scholarships for Techies!
Can't afford IT training? All 2003 ictp students receive scholarships.
Get hands-on training in Microsoft, Cisco, Sun, Linux/UNIX, and more.
www.ictp.com/training/sourceforge.asp
Received on 2003-01-21