[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       autoconf
Subject:    Re: config.sub/config.guess using nonportable $(...) substitutions
From:       "David A. Wheeler" <dwheeler () dwheeler ! com>
Date:       2021-03-10 3:33:01
Message-ID: 964579C1-6803-4400-8517-BD8026BD0ABC () dwheeler ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


> On Mar 9, 2021, at 5:08 PM, Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
> N.B. I changed Autoconf's "find us a better shell" logic in 2.70 to
> include checking for $(...) _specifically because of_ the change being
> debated here.  Configure scripts themselves still use `...`
> nigh-exclusively.

This seems like the right approach: First find a useful shell with $(...), then use that shell.
This localized the pain to the "find a shell" bootstrap.
I suspect many program-specific scripts use $(...),
so this will actually *increase* the portability of the final result.

--- David A. Wheeler


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]