Re: [bug-inetutils] Test script tooling.

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   (Creating a separate thread of sensible subject.)

Thanks!

   >    diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
   >    index 017d0ac..14dd6e3 100644
   >    --- a/configure.ac
   >    +++ b/configure.ac
   >    @@ -129,6 +129,9 @@ AC_ISC_POSIX
   >     AC_PROG_CC
   >     gl_EARLY
   >     AC_CHECK_TOOL(AR, ar)
   >    +AC_PATH_PROG(DD, dd, dd)
   >    +AC_PATH_PROG(MKTEMP, mktemp, mktemp)
   >    +AC_PATH_PROG(NETSTAT, netstat, netstat)
   > 
   > What about if those are missing?  The third argument is the value when
   > the program could not be found, so I would think that using the
   > `missing' script would be appropriate here.

   Are you imagining

      AC_PATH_PROG(NETSTAT, netstat, [$(SHELL) `pwd`/../build-aux/missing --run 
netstat])

Right, sorry I was confused.  You're using AC_PATH_PROG, not
AM_MISSING_PROG, which is what I thought you where using.  Carry on!

   > Please say `file name' (two words) instead of path, a path in GNU is a
   > search list, e.g. PATH, LD_LIBRARY_PATH, etc.  I'd skip the (8) stuff,

   We have had this discussion before. In any human understanding the
   file name (Datei) is the leaf name written into the file used by an
   operating system to record the contents of a directory
   (Verzeichnis). The directory traversal names are not included in
   that string. I find the FSF/GNU use to be contrived, close to
   contrafactive. How about "absolute path" as compromise?

       AC_ARG_VAR(NETSTAT, [Absolute path to `netstat'.])

If `absolute file name' or similar is harsh on the eys, then go for
something entierly different, say `Location of FOO'.

We use the term `file name' to refer to either a relative file (frob),
or an absolute file (/etc/frob), and the name `directory name' to
refer to n directory.  Path is only used for a list of directories,
which this isn't (but e.g. AC_PROG_PATH searchs PATH for prog., so the
usage there is proper).

I know that the path name (POSIX) vs. file/directory name (GNU) usage
is all over the place, but lets try to clean it up, even if it is just
by not introducing the confusion anymore by using the GNU dialect.

   > Would it maybe be better to provide a wrapper around id instead?
   > So that `id -u' always works (or $ID).  I'm thinking something
   > along the lines of,

   Autoconf uses the identifier ID for a completely different purpose.

Point there.

   > id()
   > {
   >   case $1 in
   >     -u) if id_without_u_p; then
   >           command id $1 | $SED -n 's,.*uid=\([0-9]*\).*,\1,p'
   >         fi
   >    break
   >     default)
   >       command id -u
   >   esac
   > }

   Excessively complicated, without any gain whatsoever. My use is

     if test func_id_uid != 0; then
       do_test_with_prio=false
     fi

Fair enough, was just a suggestion.

Happy hacking!