Re: [RFC] The documentation of general portability problems (make, shell, etc) should be in a separate manual

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC] The documentation of general portability problems (make, shell, etc) should be in a separate manual
From: Paul Eggert <eggert@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:30:50 -0800
Cc: "<autoconf@xxxxxxx>" <autoconf@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4EF619A2.2040401@gmail.com>
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
References: <4EF619A2.2040401@gmail.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0

This sounds good to me as well.  Can you propose
a patch to Autoconf?

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@xxxxxxx
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

References:
- [RFC] The documentation of general portability problems (make, shell, etc) should be in a separate manual
  - From: Stefano Lattarini

Prev by Date: [RFC] The documentation of general portability problems (make, shell, etc) should be in a separate manual
Next by Date: getting abs paths into config.h / locating aux files at run time
Previous by thread: [RFC] The documentation of general portability problems (make, shell, etc) should be in a separate manual
Next by thread: getting abs paths into config.h / locating aux files at run time
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [GCC Help] [Kernel Discussion] [RPM Discussion] [Red Hat Development] [Yosemite News] [Linux USB] [Samba]

Powered by Linux