configure output summary

[Alan DeKok]

Josip Rodin wrote:
> I've actually been a bit confused by the notion of having separate autoconf
> installations/invocation in multiple subdirectories. The point of that would
> seem to be that if you just want to reconfigure and rebuild one particular
> part, you can do it.
> 
> But who ever does that?

  Exactly.

> It seems to me that everyone only ever wants a single autoconf instance for
> the whole tree, which can generate all the subdirectory makefiles.

  Ugh.  Even better, use a build system which includes header/library
checking as part of the dependencies.  Waf && others seem to be a good
start here.

  For 2.2.x, I've been looking at getting rid of libtool && libltdl.
All modern systems have dlopen(), so that makes things easier.  Getting
rid of autoconf would be a logical next step.

  Alan DeKok.