Re: Typo in autoconf document

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Jim Warhol wrote on Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:37:44PM CET:
> >Even packages that don?t use Autoconf will generally provide a
> >?configure? script, and the most common complaint about these
> >alternative home-grown scripts is that they fail to meet one or more
> >of the GNU Coding Standars
> >(see Section ?Configuration? in The GNU Coding Standards) that users have
> >come to expect from Autoconf-generated ?configure? scripts.
> 
> s/GNU Coding Standars/GNU Coding Standarfs/

Thanks.  I pushed the patch below in your name, and added you to THANKS.

> Also, the link pointing to the GNU Coding Standards is
> http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/standards.pdf, which doeesn't 
> work.

Ah, we've never taken care of the PDF inter-manual links on www.gnu.org,
only for the one-page and multi-page HTML ones.

I've added them in automake/manual/.symlinks in the www CVS now, so
please report back if things still don't work.

THanks,
Ralf

2011-01-29  Jim Warhol  <address@hidden>  (tiny change)

        * doc/autoconf.texi (Introduction): Fix typo.
        * THANKS: Update.

diff --git a/doc/autoconf.texi b/doc/autoconf.texi
index 419dff3..b1ccb1a 100644
--- a/doc/autoconf.texi
+++ b/doc/autoconf.texi
@@ -734,7 +734,7 @@ Introduction
 the resulting @file{configure}.  Even packages that don't use Autoconf
 will generally provide a @file{configure} script, and the most common
 complaint about these alternative home-grown scripts is that they fail
-to meet one or more of the GNU Coding Standars (@pxref{Configuration, , ,
+to meet one or more of the GNU Coding Standards (@pxref{Configuration, , ,
 standards, The GNU Coding Standards}) that users
 have come to expect from Autoconf-generated @file{configure} scripts.