[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gnulib] aux-dir name - result
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gnulib] aux-dir name - result |
Date: |
Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:08:15 +0100 |
Le 23 mars 05, à 19:05, Paul Eggert a écrit :
Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:
I never saw that name.
This issue was discussed in bug-gnulib, in the thread starting here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2005-03/msg00106.html
It is also "commonly" named config/
Yes, that's true, but the argument against using "config" is here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2005-03/msg00119.html
and it carried the day in the discussion. (My favorite name was
"baux", but nobody else liked it. :-)
You bet! :)
build-aux is not absurd, it's just not standard to my eyes. And
if something else is different, then I believe that when djm
introduced AC_CONFIG_AUX_DIR, it had to be read as AC CONFIG_AUX_DIR,
not AC CONFIG AUX_DIR, i.e., I believe CONFIG is a name, not
a verb. So config-aux is more coherent, but longer, and with
a dash in it.
But these are my two cents, I don't care.