Title: Untitled Document
×𾴵ĻáÔ±£¬ÄúºÃ£¡Ò¼Ê³Æ·ÖйúÍø·þÎñÐÅÏ¢¹©Äú²Î¿¼£º
ÓµÓÐ×Ô¼ºµÄÍøÉϹ«Ë¾£¬Õ¹Ê¾¹«Ë¾²úÆ·ºÍ·þÎñ£¬Ìá¸ßÆóÒµ¾ºÕùÁ¦,ÄúÓÐÁ½ÖÖÑ¡Ôñ£º1/
ÍøÕ¾¶¨ÖÆ : ×Ô¼ºÎ¬»¤¸üУ¬¹ÜÀíǰ̨ºǫ́£¬¸ù¾ÝÆóÒµÐèÒª£¬½¨Á¢×Ô¼ºµÄÍøÉϹ«Ë¾£¬Êý¾Ý¿âÄ£¿éÈÎÄúÑ¡Ôñ£ºÉÌÇéÐÅÏ¢·¢²¼,ÍøÉϲúƷչʾ£¬¿Í»§·þÎñÖÐÐÄ,ÍøÉϹºÎ
Sorry I couldn't pay more attention to Autoconf lately. It won't
improve in a short term, IMO. Therefore, given that there are already
significant improvements compared to 2.50, I wish we release 2.51 now.
Sorry Tim, I don't have time to evaluate your proposal now :( I'm
sympathetic to your pro
On 12 Jul 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
> AC_F77_DUMMY_MAIN (action-if-fail, action-if-none, action-if-found)
>
> I have a problem at least with the order here. I'd prefer
>
> action-if-found, action-if-none, action-if-fail
>
> and I would even prefer to have
>
> action-if-found
> Sorry Tim, I don't have time to evaluate your proposal now :( I'm
> sympathetic to your problems, but DOS will never be big enough in
> Autoconf's mission to justify additional delays.
I'm okay with that - I'll simply release a DJGPP package that has those
changes applied. I was pressing it mo
Hi, Akim!
> Sorry I couldn't pay more attention to Autoconf lately. It won't
> improve in a short term, IMO. Therefore, given that there are already
> significant improvements compared to 2.50, I wish we release 2.51 now.
The same is true for me.
I think it's a good idea to make stable releas
