Re: 01-as-require-shell-fn.patch

[Akim Demaille]

 > "Paolo Bonzini" <address@hidden> writes:
 >> Now, is there a shell which AS_INIT likes (because it has good LINENO) and
 >> which fails to satisfy these requests?  If so, you do have a point, but I
 >> reckon the answer is no.

 > I tend to agree: I think the answer is no as well.

I still disagree.  It does matter to have function support, and we
don't care about LINENO at all.  There are known environment where
shell functions are not supported by default, e.g., Ultrix.

But anyway, my point was somewhat different: do you really want
Autoconf to require shell functions?  I did not.  That's why I was
referring to another AS_INIT: so that Autotest used functions,
collects the list of problems before we use it on Autoconf.

If everybody agrees we can use shell functions, then let's proceed.
This is quite an audacious change.  Given the popularity of changes in
Autoconf, I quite fear it...

 > This issue has been tested in Autoconf for some months now
 > (Functions Support, Functions and return Support in m4sh.at), and
 > nobody has reported a problem.

I do not believe that the set of people/env running make check on
Autoconf is related in anyway with the set of people/env running
configure.



My plan was:

1. - Autotest use shell function
   - we embed a spy test in all configure for at least one release
     that tries to find a shell supporting shell functions

2. we use shell functions in Autoconf



But this goes against this patch.