I renamed find_file to find_file_with_opt
Thanks.
I would prefer to rename the original function to find_file_m4
I agree in the abstract, but it's not worth creating an incompatibility.
Look, the last argument *was* described:
Yes, I saw that, but a few words in the description wo
2. find_file
No problem. I renamed find_file to find_file_with_opt and brought back the
original find_file (with new implementation, thought). Frankly, I would prefer
to rename the original function to find_file_m4, since it is more specialized,
while find_file_with_opt is more generi
Thanks for the patch, and sorry for the delayed reply. My concerns are:
1. Changing the meaning of the --libdir option so that it adds rather
than replaces. We have no way of knowing if existing projects rely on
that, but it's quite possible. A new option name is needed to avoid
breaking compatibi
Hi,
> Since the purpose of the new feature is to support per-project helper
> files (right?)…
No exactly. Per-project helper files can be easily added to the project
source with no problem. The problem if several projects share the same
helper files. Currently such files should be managed manuall
> Interesting and thorough, but I admit aclocal doesn't seem like
> a good model to me.
It could be not the best approach, but definitely good enough, since
(1) it is already exists, and (2) it is already exists in automake
(aclocal is a part of automake).
> aclocal has to do complicated things b
The problem if the same helper files are shared, i. e. used
in more than one project.
Ack.
thinking about copying existing aclocal behavior:
Interesting and thorough, but I admit aclocal doesn't seem like a good
model to me. aclocal has to do complicated things because it is merging
> Since the purpose of the new feature is to support per-project helper
> files (right?), a single system directory doesn't seem right. Let's
> not mess around with system directories if we can help it.
Not exactly. Truly per-project helper files is *not* a problem — they
can be stored in the pro
> If you, or anyone, can draft a patch, that would be great.
I think I could draft a patch, but I am not sure which interface to
choose for the new feature. I see few possible approaches:
1. Let automake look for aux files in *two* directories:
/usr/share/automake-1.16 and /usr/share/automake. I
Hi Van - first, I've copied your messages to the bug tracker, so please
use bug-automake@gnu.org and the given subject line so things stay in
the bug going forward.
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=59099
(Except my resend of your reply didn't get attached. I don't know why
not. Will tr
