* Junichi Uekawa (dancer@netfort.gr.jp) wrote: > On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 14:15:59 -0400 > Eric Dorland <eric@debian.org> wrote: > > > > Hmm.. it's not an alternative if it is not compatible. > > > It's like bison and yacc, gpc and gcc. > > > > Well to some degree they are compatible. I think a better analogy > > would be the various vi clones. They all sort of do the same things, > > but they are not necessarily compatible. > > I had an impression that newer version of automake required > newer version of autoconf, which was nowhere near compatible. Alright, the newer versions of automake are not completely backwards compatible. But the automake alternative would be more of a convenience, like x-terminal-emulator or x-window-manager. -- Eric Dorland <dorland@lords.com> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty@jabber.com 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d- s++: a-- C+++ UL+++ P++ L++ E++ W++ N+ o K- w+ O? M++ V-- PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t++ 5++ X+ R tv++ b+++ DI+ D+ G e h! r- y+ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
pgp6zvlGOBBei.pgp
Description: PGP signature