Re: Making PATH precious?

[Akim Demaille]

| Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:
| > What about making PATH a precious variable?  This way, we will be able
| > to notice when two runs are performed with different PATH.  It would
| > also make
| >
| >         PATH=foo ./configure
| >
| > similar to
| >
| >         ./configure PATH=foo
| >
| > i.e., ./config.status --recheck will _preserve_ the value of PATH.
| >
| >
| > Now the bad effect is:
| >
| > 1. PATH will automagically appear in Automake's Makefile.in because
| > autoconf AC_SUBST the precious vars and all the AC_SUBST vars are
| > automagically put in Makefile.in.
| >
| > 2. PATH will appear on the command line each time ./config.status
| > --recheck is relaunched.  For instance:
| 
| Hi Akim!
| 
| Also, that would keep me from rebuilding with a different PATH,
| even when I *know* that's what I want to do, Right?

Well, yes :(  The point is more to relieve the maintainers from lost
users, than to make _directly_ the maintainers' lives easier.

| I'm not sure it's worthwhile.
| PATH evolves.  Inevitably, people will change it,
| and then weeks later, come back to a working directory
| and find that autoconf fails.

s/autoconf/configure/

| Giving a warning might be a good compromise.

Hm...  Yes, you are right.  Thanks!