On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > According to NightStrike on 2/24/2010 8:48 AM: >> When I ran autoupdate from 2.65 against my configure.ac that I >> manually updated to 2.65, I noticed this change: >> >> -AC_PREREQ([2.65]) >> +AC_PREREQ(2.65) >> >> Why would autoupdate want to remove the quoting about the version number? > > Another instance of a low-priority bug that no one has spent time figuring > out how to patch. In my opinion, given the current state of both autoscan > and autoupdate, a developer should use them for guidance, but not trust > them as final output. In other words, a minimal patch for 2.66 (if we > don't go the route of the more complicated patch of actually fixing the > output to match good practice) would be to at least be more prominent in > the manual about the need to inspect the output of these tools for > questionable content. As a user, I would prefer it if I could trust the tools. As you may notice by all of my messages to these lists, I am constantly deferring to the better judgement of what autoconf/automake developers put forth in the mailing lists, manual, and in the provided tools. If the tool is telling me to not quote it, I'm going to think that I should not quote it. Anything you can do to improve the reliability of the scan/update tools would be greatly appreciated. _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
