Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > Also, AC_PROG_YACC doesn't do this. It simply prints one line of output, >> > like most other autoconf tests. >> >> Right, but AC_PROG_YACC doesn't test whether there is a yacc tool >> installed. > > Huh? Autoconf's doc says: > > -- Macro: AC_PROG_YACC > If `bison' is found, set output variable `YACC' to `bison -y'. > Otherwise, if `byacc' is found, set `YACC' to `byacc'. Otherwise > set `YACC' to `yacc'.
I was unclear and made a somewhat obscure reference -- AC_PROG_YACC has the weird semantics that it will set YACC to yacc without checking if there is a yacc binary installed. AC_PROG_PATH doesn't do that. If the requested tool isn't available, AC_PROG_PATH will not touch the variable at all, and it will typically be empty. > Really I don't see a difference between the situations for bison, gperf, and > gaa. All three are development tools needed by the maintainer but not needed > for users of a tarball. All three are not among the set of tools required > by 'configure'. I think that depends on how you regard 'users'. Some users modify the code. > The only difference I see is the immediate reference to the download > location in the gaa macro, but this is what an INSTALL or > DEPENDENCIES file is good for, no? Sure, that also works. /Simon
