Re: some missing _LT_DECL_SED requirements

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hallo Ralf!

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Wed, May 17, 2006 at 07:48:14PM CEST:
> > Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > > >         * libltdl/m4/libtool.m4 (_LT_LINKER_OPTION): Require
> > > > >         _LT_DECL_SED.
> > > > >         (_LT_CMD_GLOBAL_SYMBOLS, _LT_LINKER_SHLIBS): Likewise.
> > > > >         * libltdl/m4/ltdl.m4 (LTDL_INIT): Likewise.
> > > > >         Report by Eric Blake.
> > >        (_LT_DECL_SED): Set $Xsed here, using $SED.  Moved from...
> > >        (_LT_SETUP): ...here.
> > All the more evidence for a nice automated check! :-)
>
> I don't think so.  Let's make it less unnecessary automation for once.
> Less factorization, less requirements stuff; after all, there is IMHO no
> need to factorize unless the stuff is actually supposed to possibly used
> in different combinations.  But I've ranted about AC_REQUIRE/m4_require
> and Libtool macros before, enough of that now...

Perhaps you misunderstand me?  I'm advocating sh.test style static
check that tries to match uses of, say, $EGREP in an AC_DEFUN with a
matching m4_require([_LT_DECL_EGREP]) at ``make test'' time.

Cheers,
        Gary.
--
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://blog.azazil.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://trac.azazil.net/projects/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook