On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 10:06:40AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Noah Misch wrote: > > Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: > > > I'm leery of assuming that Autoconf's version will always be at > > > this spot in the output of --version. Sometimes people customize their > > > copy and tweak --version to reflect so: > > > ... > > > % gcc --version > > > gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 (Debian 4.0.3-1) Another thought -- To defend against customizations of this nature, we could use the entire first line of `autoconf --version', rather than attempting to parse out a version number. > > With respect to `--version' output, GNU Coding Standards state, `The > > first line is meant to be easy for a program to parse; the version > > number proper starts after the last space.' Customizing `gcc > > --version' in this way certainly is common, but it does violate the > > Coding Standards. > > I can see what is being attempted, to identify something as having > patches making it no longer strictly an upstream version. That seems > admirable. But perhaps the implementation could be improved. Perhaps > instead of "gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 (Debian 4.0.3-1)" the output could join > the version with "gcc (GCC) 4.0.3.Debian-1" or some such? Or at the > possibly it should be "gcc (GCC) 4.0.3 Debian 4.0.3-1" such that the > version after the last space is 4.0.3-1 and an intended representative > version number? Yes; those look reasonable. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
