Hello Eric. Just a clarification, and my 2 cents... On Thursday 17 March 2011, Eric Blake wrote: > We have an existing use case that argues for unexpanded (automake's > desire to write tests for dummy packages that use arbitrary names that > happen to match m4 builtins that aren't in the m4_ reserved namespace). > Seeing existing use cases that argue for expanded, as well as a > comparison of which camp is larger, will definitely sway which way this > patch series goes (we may end up instead changing > _AS_DETECT_BETTER_SHELL to expand, and to tell automake to fix their > testsuite to avoid the issue of naming a package with an m4 builtin). > Automake has already fixed its testsuite in this regard, because it wants to remain compatible with all autoconf versions back to 2.62; moreover, the failure we encountered was spurious anyaway -- i.e., the name of the dummy package wasn't really important, thus we simply changed it to avoid triggering the autoconf "bug".
So, even if I personally prefer the new behaviour your patch implements, the Automake testsuite is *not* a real use case for it. On the other hand, what if a new project wants to name itself 'GNU index' or 'GNU eval'? The current autoconf implementation would prevent it to do so, unless it uses an extra level of quoting: AC_INIT([[GNU eval]], [1.0]) But then, would autoconf really handle these extra quotes gracefully in all its codebase? Regards, Stefano
