On Sep 12, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
Bruno proposed using undocumented macros: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2007-09/msg00092.htmlAs I am not a fan of that approach, perhaps it is time to document the macros instead, so that the use is kosher? These two macros have been available since 2.53, with no major change in functionality, so I think they are robust enoughto expose. Any arguments why I should not apply this?
It looks great. The name m4_PACKAGE_VERSION is somewhat misleading however (as I understand it, it contains the current version of autoconf right? So why not name it like m4_AUTOCONF_VERSION or whatever?).
-- Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna EPITA Research and Development Laboratory
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
