Quoting Wayne Johnson (waynej at dccmn.com): > I've used ANT and make for our products. Contrary to the hype, I don't > think ANT is any easier to use than make, and with the added versatility > of make, IMHO go with make. I'll counter this to say ant is more flexiable then make, at least in the java world. > If anyone tells you that the XML in ant is easier to code because it > doesn't have all those tabs, their full of it. The build.xml files aren't easy to make (nor is sendmail.cf!), but once you get use to it it's not all that bad. My biggest reason for ant (in the java world) is that it's magnitudes faster then make. > CVS, make, and rsh for multi-platform products. Throw in some perl for ^^^ No! ssh, please! -- Bob Tanner <tanner at real-time.com> | Phone : (952)943-8700 http://www.mn-linux.org, Minnesota, Linux | Fax : (952)943-8500 http://www.tcwug.org, Minnesota, Wireless | Coding isn't a crime. Fingerprint: 02E0 2734 A1A1 DBA1 0E15 623D 0036 7327 93D9 7DA3