[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: really small nitpick

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: really small nitpick
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 23:28:15 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

Hi Laurence, Bruce,

* Laurence Darby wrote on Sun, Mar 26, 2006 at 05:01:19PM CEST:
> Bruce Korb wrote:
> > No.  Autoscan should:
> > 
> >    if test -f

> >    else
> >       echo "NOTE: creating file" >&2
> >
> >       touch
> >    fi
> > 
> > i.e. do the right thing and signal the user what is being done.
> > Eliminate extra unnecessary steps.  :)  Of course, that needs
> > to be translated into perl.  Thanks - Bruce

Not quite, IMVHO.  The user is responsible for creating `'.
I think it's a feature that this file is not changed automatically.  And
also the manual explains that one possibility is to just rename
`configure.scan' to `' after manual checking.  I for one am
always wary of overwriting created files.

> The first two checks are already there, so it's quite simple.  I made a
> small patch for it, could it be applied please?

This code is used by more than just autoscan, and it's necessary that
the other programs fail when they do not find a suitable

I'm checking this patch in instead, which should remove the warning.


        * bin/ The value of find_configure_ac should be
        checked for existence, so we don't barf over a nonexisting  Reported by Laurence Darby <address@hidden>.

Index: bin/
RCS file: /cvsroot/autoconf/autoconf/bin/,v
retrieving revision 1.103
diff -u -r1.103
--- bin/     6 Jan 2006 00:10:37 -0000       1.103
+++ bin/     26 Mar 2006 21:22:59 -0000
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@
 output ('configure.scan');
-if ($configure_ac)
+if (-f $configure_ac)
     check_configure_ac ($configure_ac);

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]