[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case |
Date: |
31 Jan 2002 15:16:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Common Lisp) |
| Am Don, 2002-01-31 um 12.09 schrieb Akim Demaille:
| > >>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:
| >
| > >>>>> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <address@hidden> writes:
| > Ralf> If using the new AC_INIT and AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE syntax, PACKAGE
| > Ralf> gets translated to lower case letters. - Why this change?
| >
| > Akim> Because that's the case for most packages.
| >
| > Tom> I think the underlying question is, why does autoconf make this
| > Tom> change at all?
| >
| > What change?
| <sigh> Things are going to get silly. </sigh>
|
| * Lowercasing PACKAGE
| * Using a lowercased PACKAGE_TARNAME in "make dist"
_You_ still do not understand.
Automake names PACKAGE what Autoconf name PACKAGE_TARNAME. In
addition, Autoconf support PACKAGE_NAME. Because in many cases
PACKAGE_TARNAME can be computed from the PACKAGE_NAME, such a
_default_ is provided. If you don't like it, define your value for
the TARNAME.
But again, I repeat, nothing can have changed here, since it was not
existing before. Read again: Autoconf has two where Automake has one,
and you don't seem to see that you confuse the two Autoconf's.
| > Tom> Why not let the user write what he intends, and then just respect
| > Tom> it? I confess I don't understand the rationale here.
| >
| > There are two concepts here: the package name (GNU Autoconf), and the
| > package tarball name (autoconf). There is no change at all, only
| > *new* things.
|
| >From an automake user's point of view there are behavioral changes:
|
| * Lowercasing PACKAGE
| * Using a lowercased PACKAGE_TARNAME in "make dist"
No, no, and *no*.
*If* you don't define the TARNAME, *then* it defaults to
lower-case-and-dash of the PACKAGE_ *NAME*!
| >From a usability point of view:
| * The old AC_INIT/AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE-API was clean, simple and straight.
| * The tricks introduced by your patch from yesterday are ugly.
What tricks? What ugly? You want an additional parameter to AC_INIT,
that's your point? _This_ is what I find ugly. Why would we need an
additional macro or parameter to essentially define a value? But,
really, if you prefer, I can add a fourth parameter:
AC_INIT(GNU Foo Bar, 1.0, address@hidden, GnuFooBar)
- AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Akim Demaille, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Tom Tromey, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/30
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Akim Demaille, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Tim Van Holder, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Tim Van Holder, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Akim Demaille, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Russ Allbery, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Ralf Corsepius, 2002/01/31
- Re: AC_INIT translates PACKAGE to lower case, Dan Kegel, 2002/01/31