On Tuesday 14 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 05:33:39PM CEST: > > <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8784> > > On Thursday 02 June 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > > Continuing with the good trend of avoiding to impinge on the user > > > namespace, we should start supporting AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS > > > in addition to DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS, so that the former can be > > > reserved for the developer to be set in the 'Makefile.am's, and the > > > latter left for the user, packager or tester to use freely. > > Sure, but: the previous lack of AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS was due to > the motivation that developers should make their code buildable > without any special configure options. > Sure, but: the documentation wasn't aligned with this positions, as it suggested to define DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS in Makefile.am without giving any warning :-). However ...
> I would suggest to at least discourage using this in the documentation. > ... I agree, and I will make the change soon. Maybe I can find a couple of examples of where the AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS could be useful *and* legitimate; which would make my change more meaningful. > Other than that, the patch looks OK to me, thanks. > > Cheers, > Ralf > Thanks, Stefano
