X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Date:	Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:07:14 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	"Peter J. Farley III" <pjfarley AT dorsai DOT org>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: autoconf-2.50-iscated & automake-1.5-ified packages and SFN
In-Reply-To:	<5.1.0.14.2.20020310155911.027a8ec0@mail.dorsai.org>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1020311080151.14603E-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sun, 10 Mar 2002, Peter J. Farley III wrote:

> I know that GNU doesn't distribute the config.* files separately 
> packaged (though frankly, I think they really should), but perhaps 
> DJGPP should do so for its users.  We could then include the 
> DJGPP-specific config.site with this (small) package.

The idea is that config.site distributed with Bash should add whatever is 
missing in it now.  Mark did that for the versions released in the past.

As for other config.* files, they need to be changed in small ways as 
Autoconf, Automake, libtool, and other development tools evolve.  They 
also have package-dependent names in a couple of places.  So I'm not sure 
having a standard set of these files would help more than just 
downloading the latest port from SimTel.  But if someone wants to make 
such a package, please feel free.  (Personally, I'd think that it is much 
more important to explain all the subtleties those config.* files are 
supposed to deal with, than just throw them together.  So if someone is 
up to documenting those things, it'd be great.)

> Is there any common agreement in the GNU community on where in the 
> "standard" tree these files should be stored?

DJGPP does not have a standard home in the GNU tree hierarchy, AFAIK.

- Raw text -