Subject: Re: New config.site in autoconf 2.57 port
From: Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <3E24992F.E159BAEC@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
References: <3E249440 DOT 7000901 AT mif DOT vu DOT lt>
	 <3E24992F DOT E159BAEC AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: 
Message-Id: <1042616677.25380.6.camel@leeloo>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.1 
Date: 15 Jan 2003 08:44:37 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2003-01-15 at 00:11, Richard Dawe wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> Laurynas Biveinis wrote:
> > with new config.site now every autoconf 2.13 script generates a warning:
> > 
> > Warning: This configure script was generated using an old version of
> > autoconf
> > Warning: Newer versions have much better DJGPP compatibility
> > 
> > What's the purpose of this warning? IMHO it is simply useless because
> > configure scripts are meant to be run by all users who install from
> > sources and not only by package maintainers. Ordinary users cannot fix
> > this (you cannot take 2.13 configure.in, regenerate configure with new
> > autoconf and expect it to work) and developers should be aware of this
> > already.
> 
> Most packages come pre-configured, so you shouldn't need to run the configure
> script in most cases. I agree it isn't particularly helpful. Pardon the
> "slippery shoulders", but I just included the config.site that Tim van Holder
> gave me. Tim, what do you think?
> 
> Bye, Rich =]

Frankly I don't much care either way.  As you say, configure will not
typically be run by a user (assuming the package was properly configured
to begin with), and this message alerts the user that updating the
configure script may improve things.  But I also agree that since only
the developers/porters will be in a position to do something about it,
the message is of limited usefulness to the user.
In fact, I think I only put it in to test whether the correct part of
config.site was being read (and since at the time I rebuilt every
configure I ran across, I did not see the message often).

-- 
Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>