From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT vanholder AT falconsoft DOT be>
To: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, <tim DOT vanholder AT falconsoft DOT be>
Cc: <pjfarley3 AT escape DOT com>, <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Which config.site should be used, bash or autoconf 2.50?
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 21:10:11 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEGKOHJKAAFPKOCLHDICEMPCFAA.tim.vanholder@falconsoft.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
In-Reply-To: <7263-Tue24Jul2001210234+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Importance: Normal
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> So we should for now advise people to stay with config.site from Bash,
> unless they need to run only the scripts generated by the ported
> Autoconf.  Is that correct?

Yes.