At Friday 11 June 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 08:48:51PM CEST: > > At Thursday 10 June 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > Yes. The changes are ok if you split the patch into one purely > > > without semantic changes, and the rest (so that we don't need > > > to revert the former when the latter turns out to be bad); > > > > Seems sensible. Agreed. > > The patches 1/3 and 2/3 are ok now for maint, thanks. > > > Since I was at it, I also wrote a third patch, which adds code > > (again stolen from autoconf) to ensure that the bootstap script > > is run in bourne-compatibility mode. > > Is there any indication this change is needed? Nope, not at the moment. > It looks ok, and I'm not against it if you plan on adding code > later that needs it, Presently, I have no plan to do so. > but otherwise would prefer to not add this just for the heck of it. OK, no problem (I somewaht forsaw your objections, that's way I kept the change in a separate patch). If we'll need that code some day, it's just a matter of 10-seconds cut&paste.
Regards, Stefano
