> From: "Tim Van Holder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2001 13:12:26 +0200 > > Please use $PATH_SEPARATOR, not ':' (even for such hardcoded Unix > paths), and use "[\\/]* | ?:[\\//]" to check for absolute paths. > I think all DOS/Win32-based systems that can run configure use a > POSIX-compatible shell to do so,
If so, then why bother with PATH_SEPARATOR here? A POSIX-compatible shell must obey ":" in PATH. Come to think of it, why do we need PATH_SEPARATOR at all? At the early stage, when we are detecting what kind of shell we're using, we can transliterate ";" to ":" if we discover we are in a DOS environment. Then we don't need to use PATH_SEPARATOR at all, except in one little bit of code. That should be far superior to sprinkling PATH_SEPARATOR all over the place -- the PATH_SEPARATOR stuff has introduced bugs, and is partly why 2.52e doesn't run on Solaris 8. > but that's no reason not to support DOSish environments here. There is a reason not to use it: it makes the code harder to read and to support. We shouldn't contort the code if we don't have to. And we should minimize the intrusiveness of DOS support when that is at all possible.
