Re: [bug-gnulib] aux-dir name - result

[Akim Demaille]

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.