Re: a saner bootstrap script

[Gary V. Vaughan]

[[Cc: Bruno in the hope of advice on the right approach]]

Hi Pádraig,

On 6 Oct 2011, at 16:13, Pádraig Brady wrote:

> On 10/06/2011 09:28 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> autopoint and gettext are synonymous, right?  If not, only the gettext-0.18.1
>> check is made automatically, and I need to figure out the right way to also 
>> check for
>> autopoint.
> 
> They're in different packages on my system:
> 
> $ rpm -qf $(which autopoint)
> gettext-devel-0.18.1.1-7.fc15.x86_64
> $ rpm -qf $(which gettext)
> gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc15.x86_64
> 
> So maybe an explicit table entry is appropriate?

I'm not sure.

There is already a require_autopoint function in my bootstrap rewrite, although
currently it simply accepts the contents of AUTOPOINT as an override to the 
default,
or sets it AUTOPOINT=true when autopoint is not in PATH, so that subsequent code
can easily check for whether an autopoint binary was found or specified.  There 
is
an underlying assumption here that if AM_GNU_GETTEXT was seen in configure.ac, 
then
gettext was checked for already, and so autopoint should be available too.  
Perhaps
the right fix, then, is to note when configure.ac indicates that autopoint is
necessary to bootstrap, and causes bootstrap to exit with a diagnostic if not?

Another approach would be to look for autopoint automatically when 
AM_GNU_GETTEXT is
seen at the same point as gettext is automatically checked at the moment.

For parity with the incumbent coreutils script, I think I only need to specify 
the
autopoint requirement *instead* of gettext when AM_GNU_GETTEXT is seen, but I 
don't
think that's a great idea because you've already pointed out that it's possible 
to
get one without the other.

Advice?

Cheers,
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)