[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] Document libtool variable to_host_file_cmd.

From: Charles Wilson
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Document libtool variable to_host_file_cmd.
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:37:23 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3

On 9/17/2010 1:30 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 06:28:46PM CEST:
>> OK to push?
> OK.  Why the  s/system/platform/ changes though?  I see that
> libtool.texi uses platform a lot, and also uses system quite a bit but
> not quite as often.  Other GNU documentation I think prefers system
> however.  Or are you trying to make a distinction between both terms?

Yes, the GNU Build System is already mentioned (with an xref to the
definition in another manual).  It refers to the whole
autoconf/automake/libtool process flow, as distinct from imake or scons
or whatever.

IMO, using 'build system' to refer to the $build platform could be
confused with that term.

If other GNU documentation uses the same phrase to mean two different
things, that doesn't mean we should do so as well.

> In that case, they should probably be defined somewhere (and I'd venture
> to say that they are not good terms to try to differentiate, because
> most users will not think there could be a difference).

We don't have a choice; the GNU Build System has already been given that
name by others, and we can't change that.  Our only choice is whether to
use a term that could be confused with it: 'build system' or not.  I say
not, whenever possible -- but I'm not doctrinaire about it. I'm not
about to go thru all of libtool.texi with a red pen, changing 'build
system' everywhere I see it...but to_host_file_cmd and to_tool_file_cmd
are so similar -- and defvar'ed so close together, that I thought they
should use similar terminology.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]