"James Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I believe so. In findutils I ended up working around the problem by > defining a FINDLIB_REPLACE_FUNCS defun which populates @[EMAIL PROTECTED] > In other words I used essentially the same idea but with different > macro and variable names.
Couldn't we do something similar in gnulib? E.g., use GNULIB_REPLACE_FUNCS instead? Then AC_REPLACE_FUNCS in people's package will continue to work.
