Re: Functions / satellite scripts (Was: bison-1.29c 'configure' problems on Solaris 8.)

[Earnie Boyd]

"Lars J. Aas" wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:18:13AM -0400, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> : Paul Eggert wrote:
> : > I think this idea is a blind alley.  If we want to use modern shell
> : > features, then we should go ahead and require the "configure" user to
> : > have a modern shell.  That's much simpler.  We've already started down
> : > that path with the LINENO changes.
> :
> : Wouldn't this be solvable by autoconf supplying it's own Shell
> : executable?  Let's see...uhm...autosh sounds like a good name.  It
> : wouldn't need to be interactive friendly so perhaps a starting point
> : would be the old Linux ash shell.
> 
> Then you can only use Autoconf on systems with C compilers.  If that wasn't
> the case, I would be all for this :)
> 

How many systems with Bourne compliant shells don't have a C compiler?
How many systems without GNU m4 that need to build it?
IMNSHO a C compiler should be a requirement of autoconf even if C isn't
the language being autoconfigured.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com