Am Fre, 2002-02-01 um 12.33 schrieb Akim Demaille: > >>>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Ralf> Am Don, 2002-01-31 um 22.31 schrieb Alexandre Duret-Lutz: > >> >>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > Ralf> Am Don, 2002-01-31 um 17.27 schrieb Russ Allbery: > >> [...] > >> > >> >> Why are you lowercasing the package name? > >> > >> For the same reason a leading `GNU ' is stripped: because for most > >> packages this is the way to transform a package name into a tarball > >> name. > >> > >> `GNU Autoconf' => `autoconf' > Ralf> Hmm, do I really need to like this? > > Ralf> IMHO, this is equally bad and error-prone as lowercasing. Why > Ralf> not letting program authors/maintain decide upon this? > > What the heck is your point?
Would you please read what I wrote under 1) in my previous mail. To summarize, I am saying that * autoconf's is going beyond it's actual tasks and because of this interferes/conflicts with automake and gettext wrt. PACKAGE and PACKAGE_TARNAME. * lowercasing and stripping of GNU from package name should remain user's tasks. * AC_INIT internals and features are at least highly questionable and should be redesigned. You are right, the currently implementation does provide the features I would want, but am not satisfied with the general behavior, which IMO does more harm than it uses, rsp. is useless in probably 95% of all cases (packages using lowercased single-word package names). BTW, I would appreciate the other autoconf and automake maintainers to speak up, because apparently a reasonable discussion between Akim and me doesn't seem to be possible anymore. Ralf
