>>>>> "dv" == Didier Verna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
dv> 1/ It is not documented. Is it intentional or just an ommision ?
A bit of both. If you think this is the right signature, please
proceed a submit an update of the documentation.
dv> 2/ AC_PACKAGE_BUGREPORT is not used anywhere. Same question. Maybe
dv> it's supposed to go in --help or --version ?
Should go at the bottom of --help, see `autoconf --help' for a model.
I was still wondering whether we should also give autoconf-bug as an
address. Maybe we should give both of them?
> AC_PACKAGE(Foo, 2.bar, [EMAIL PROTECTED])
] ~ace % ./configure --help| sed -n '$p'
] Report bugs to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
? Or
] ~ace % ./configure --help| sed -n '$p'
] Report bugs to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
?
I don't want bug-autoconf to be flooded because of bad written
`configure.in', and, OTOH, it seems normal that the Autoconf
maintainer, given their expertise, help the maintainers when they face
such a problem. In particular, if we set up an FAQ, we are more
likely to provide a quick and efficient answer to a problem we might
be aware of, that the maintainers don't know.
Akim
