>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Paul> I very much like the bug report quoted below, and I suggest that
Paul> it be put into the autoconf source code somewhere, either next
Paul> to the code that generates config.cache, or perhaps into a new
Paul> section of documentation that discusses autoconf portability
Paul> issues.
I do agree.
In fact I see a few more options:
- it's been a long a few of us talked of a `writing portable
scripts.texi', and it might be a good time to start it.
- extending the ChangeLog entry which corresponds with this additional
information.
I like the first option, though extending the `portability' section
might be a first step to this.
Currently I say the portability section as meant for users of
Autoconf, who don't know such details IMHO. Anyway, whatever the
solution, it must go somewhere :) Nonetheless, I'd really like to
extend the ChangeLog entry. I would like that we do that each time we
can clarify something.
Finally, I'd like to understand how this turns out to be a malign bug.
I mean, I do see the 8th bits are set while they should not, but if
such a bug could have leaved inside a shell, it probably means that
the shell itself doesn't care about the 8th bit, doesn't it?
So where did it *hurt*, where did that 8th bit set made a difference?
What wrong behavior appeared?
Akim
