Re: Autoconf should not require to be in the path

[Peter Eisentraut]

Akim Demaille writes:

> >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Eisentraut <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Peter> With sources from just now (2.52i), the autoconf executable
> Peter> requires autom4te to be in the path.  This is inappropriate.
>
> Why?

First, because it makes it very cumbersome and error-prone to have more
than one version of Autoconf installed.  Second, in some build
environments (say, some RPM build), you might not have complete control
over the path.

> Peter> The attached patch prepends the configured bindir to the
> Peter> program names before they are substituted into the executables
> Peter> so that they look into the standard installation location by
> Peter> default.
>
> It is on purpose that we really on PATH.  Similarly, autoreconf relies
> on the path for gettextize, automake, aclocal, libtoolize and so on.

But those come from different packages, so the standards are lower.  I
guess.

> If you don't want to rely on the path, use the envvars.
>
> Hard coding positions of executables seems like a bad idea to me :(

If there any reason why the first executable in path should be preferred
over the executable in the installation directory?  I don't think so.
The executable in the installation directory is *known* to be right one,
unless you have special requirements, but the first executable in the path
might be anything, or it might not be there at all.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   address@hidden