9 Jan
2003
9 Jan
'03
8:15 a.m.
But you don't object to using the language "autoconf2.50" per se? It shouldn't be too much trouble to make run_autoconf check whether the binary "autoconf" implements the language "autoconf2.50" or not, and bail out if it doesn't. Other packages tend to do this.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2003-01-09 13:53: Subject: autoheader
I don't like the idea of incompatible changes in a computer language. Autoconf is used like a language. If it were a new language, say "autoconf3", or autodetected so it always used the correct backwards compatible version, I wouldn't mind.
/ Mirar