Hi, On Sat, Feb 05, 2005 at 01:01:03AM +0100, Gregorio Guidi wrote: > I think the 'standard' way to use AC_ARG_WITH (from the packager's point of > view) in a case such as the acl one, should be like this: > If the user gave --without-acl, disable acl support this is usual practice, there is not much need to emphasize it. > without checking if it's available on the system. Sound nice, but there might be some technical problem. (I'll post a separate mail in a minute.) For now, don't mention this. > If the user gave --with-acl, check if acl is available on the system and > enable it; if acl cannot be found on the system, fail with an error (because > the user explicitely requested acl support). Yes, that needs to be emphasized. > If the user didn't give --with-acl or --without-acl, check for acl and enable > it if it's availabe. Perhaps the package author thinks the acl support is not stable enough. So we cannot require this, the author can change any default they want. Have a nice day, Stepan _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
