RE: AC_PREFIX_PATH, AS_BASENAME fixes and a new test! (revisited)

[Paul Wagland]

Hi all,

As requested by Akim....One patch with a Changelog. The Changelog is hand
made but I think it is formatted correctly.

I am not sure what the standard is, but should AS_* macros not be
"generally" used? I.e., are they internal to autoconf macros? In particular
reference to the documentation referenced below, so that I know what to
write :-)

I am about to go on a two week holiday (Sunny Spain! :-) but will have a
look at the documentation issues when I get back.

Hope this helps,
-- Paul

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Akim Demaille [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 16:13
> To: Paul Wagland
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: AC_PREFIX_PATH, AS_BASENAME fixes and a new test!
>
>
>
> | Hope you find these useful, there are actually five patches
> here, but I put
> | two of them into the same file. I will describe the patch
> attachments and
> | the bugs fixed or features added.
>
> All this seems good to me, thanks! Please send it as a single patch
> with a ChangeLog entry.
>
>
> | autoconf.fix_prefix.path.gz
> |   -- In autoconf 2.13, and in the info pages, it states that
> AC_PREFIX_PATH
> | will return the prefix of a binary. the examples given are
> using gcc located
> | in '/usr/local/bin/gcc' should return '/usr/local'. autoconf
> 2.13 does do
> | this! the current CVS does not! it returns '/usr/local/bin'. This patch
> | corrects that behaviour.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> | Finally, maybe this should be discussed elsewhere, but there
> should be a fix
> | to the info documentation. In the section on unreliable commands it
> | describes:
> |
> | `dirname'
> |      Not all hosts have `dirname', but it is reasonably easy to emulate,
> | e.g.:
> |
> |           dir=`expr "x$file" : 'x\(.*\)/[^/]*' \|
> |                     '.'      : '.'
> |
> |
> | Perhaps this should refer to the AS_DIRNAME macro, as it is actually
> | guaranteed to work, since it has the sed fallback...
>
> This might no be the proper place to document AS_DIRNAME, but it it OK
> to document the expr and sed based alternative in their full length.
>
> | Maybe there should also be a section added on the basename command? If
> | people agree, then I will make up a patch for the english documentation.
> | Please let me know.
>
> That would be perfect!
>
> Thanks _a lot_.
>
>

autoconf.patch
Description: Binary data