Hi Ralf, On 2008-03-14 00:30:51 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > I'm not quite sure how to proceed from here. Testing presence of all > tools listed in the GNU Coding Standards is certainly not efficient.
I don't think it would be inefficient. That would be a few more commands to run compared to all the commands normally run in a configure script (and IMHO, not all the standard commands need to be tested, only the most complex ones, that could be missing for this reason). In particular, concerning diff, this would not just improve the error message: cmp could be used as a replacement for diff only when diff is detected as missing (cmp should work correctly on real Unix machines, so that this should not be a problem). > OTOH if certain tools are not present on important porting targets, > then maybe the GCS needs further discussion on. I'll send a mail to bug-standards. -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / Arenaire project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
