Re: ACL and --without-all

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Paul Eggert writes:
 > Dmitry Antipov wrote:

 > > Also I believe that it should be --with/--without, not --enable/--disable.
 > 
 > Other GNU packages use --enable/--disable, though;
 > it's better to be consistent.

The --enable/--with distinction is unnecessary and hard to understand.

XEmacs simply makes --with-foo and --enable-foo equivalent by
automatically defining both the --with-foo option and the --enable-foo
option, automatically setting the corresponding with_foo variable when
the --enable-foo option is used, and ignoring the enable_foo variable.
When it makes sense to have a --enable-foo option and a --with-foo-lib
option, that's exactly what we do.

Works great, for developers and users.  No backward-compatibility
complaints about this system in 10 years, either.  Apparently it never
broke ./configure --recheck or anybody's scripts.