Re: boost macros use non-portable tac

[Peter Johansson]

On 9/26/12 9:52 PM, Peter Simons wrote:
> you raise a valid point. Some systems may not have tac, so it's surely
> better not to depend on that utility. At the same time, the patch that
> introduced the dependency had a valid use case, too. So how do we deal
> with that? Does m4 have something we can use instead of depending on
> tac?
Hi Peter,

IIUC, 'tac' was introduced to reverse the order of the output from 'ls', 
and I'm thinking that just  replacing 'ls' with 'ls -r' would suffice, 
or am I missing something?

Cheers,
Peter