Re: include bindir in AUTOM4TE default

[Ralf Corsepius]

Am Mit, 2002-02-13 um 16.38 schrieb Akim Demaille:
> >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> juhp> How about moving autom4te from bindir to say datadir?
> >> I'm against that!
> Ralf> I am for it (Not necessarily datadir, but outside of bindir).
> 
> Why?
It is not one of the designated user-tools: The tool always has been
called "autoconf".

This is not any different from what other tools do: 
"gcc" is gcc's designated user-tool/driver, no matter how many other
tools are lurking underneath (cc1plus, collect) and which plethora of
options they might require.

> >> autom4te is public.
> Ralf> Why? Please elaborate. With my limited mental horizon I fail to
> Ralf> see how it can be applied directly, i.e. not underneath of
> Ralf> autoconf etc.
> 
> In a perfect world, there would not be autoconf, just autom4te -l
> autoconf.
The name of the game is "autoconf", not autom4te -l autoconf.

If, as your answer indicates, autoconf is "nothing but a wrapper script
for autom4te", this would even be a stronger argument for hiding it
entirely away from the user - Let him apply a small set of handy
wrappers and hide away as much of it as possible.

> >> For the time being, it is just not documented, but it is not meant
> >> to be in datadir at all.
> 
> Ralf> Hmm, for now autom4te is nothing but an internal implementation
> Ralf> detail.
> 
> wrt autoconf, autom4te is nothing but an implementation detail.  Wrt
> to Autoconf, M4sugar, M4sh, Autotest etc. autom4te is the entry point.
The only point that matters is the name of tools the user invokes (The
UI if you want to) - M4sugar, M4sh, autotest and autom4te are not among
them and therefore are implementation details.

Or are you really suggesting that users shall invoke autom4te <whatever>
in future?

Ralf