The reason I asked is the fortran dependency tracker that I'm writing. I just figured that I could write some things more elegantly if shell functions were allowed. If I understand right what Akim writes, I do not need to worry about shells without functions in a fortran dependency tracking tool. However, I still have to explore other possibilities. -- Martin Wilck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Institute for Tropospheric Research, Permoserstr. 15, D-04318 Leipzig, Germany Tel. +49-341-2352151 / Fax +49-341-2352361 _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
- Autoconf Extension Files Akim Demaille
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Jim Meyering
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Jim Meyering
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Alexandre Oliva
- sh compatibility question Martin Wilck
- Re: sh compatibility question Akim Demaille
- Re: sh compatibility question Pavel Roskin
- Re: sh compatibility question Akim Demaille
- Re: sh compatibility question Martin Wilck
- Re: sh compatibility question Gary V. Vaughan
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Earnie Boyd
- RE: Autoconf Extension Files Bernard Dautrevaux
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Akim Demaille
- Re: [autoconf] RE: Autoconf Extension Files Rüdiger Kuhlmann
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Alexandre Oliva
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Earnie Boyd
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Peter Eisentraut
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Peter Eisentraut
- Re: Autoconf Extension Files Alexandre Oliva