On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 19:20:50 -0500, Jameson Graef Rollins <jroll...@finestructure.net> wrote: > > Your commit message has that flag word of "also" in it, and as it turns > > out, the removal of Makefile.config from the repository has actually > > happened already. But that was easy enough to fix. > > I was thinking that the removal of the Makefile.config from the repo > went together with the new auto-generation of that file from configure > script. Do you think they still should have been separate patches?
No, it was fine. It's just funny to me how often that word "also" in a
commit message seems to end up being a predictor for things later, (like
this case where half of a patch is already implemented, or much worse,
how often a bisect lands on a commit that makes multiple changes).
So I was really just expressing amusement at seeing it again.
> > > +# option parsing
> > > +for option; do
> > > + if [ "${option%=*}" = '--prefix' ] ; then
> > > + PREFIX="${option#*=}"
> > > + fi
> > > +done
> >
> > I've gone ahead and committed that now. Then I noticed that we should
> > really use ${option%%=*} to support the case of an option value
> > containing an '=' character. So I fixed that.
>
> Ah, good catch. Sorry about that.
No worries. I was just impressed at the tiny amount of code needed for
the parsing here, so ended up looking closer to understand it.
> Autoconf terrifies me, so I agree I'm quite happy with the simple
> configure script we have right now. If it gets the job done without
> having to deal with autoconf then that's great in my book.
Cool. At least not everyone thinks I'm crazy then. That's
encouraging. :-)
-Carl
pgplDoLzToHyz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
