Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread pluto--- via Bug reports for autoconf
James Cloos wrote: > should the scripts also check for 'busybox awk' in $PATH? Do they check for other commands that way? It should not be necessary, unless we want to allow for a busybox that is installed strangely.

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Paul Eggert
On 2025-04-18 10:32, Zack Weinberg wrote: this hypothetical 'shawk' would be a *harder* task than converting all the existing unconditional uses of awk to use sed instead. In 2007 we starting using awk in config.status because sed didn't always handle backslash-newline correctly, and because o

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Bruno Haible via Bug reports for autoconf
Simon Josefsson wrote: > I'm concerned about rewriting efforts, they tend to never get finished. Right. And the target of the rewrite should be something that is not changing rapidly. Because users in the year 2040 should be able to take a tarball packaged in 2030 and configure and build it. This

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Zack Weinberg
On Fri, Apr 18, 2025, at 12:48 PM, Simon Josefsson via Bug reports for autoconf wrote: > "Zack Weinberg" writes: I think the main aspect > here is to see if we can find unnecessary dependencies on some tools, > and fix them. Sometimes code that rely on 'cmp' or 'diff' can be > rewritten in some

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Simon Josefsson via Bug reports for autoconf
"Zack Weinberg" writes: > For additional clarity, the purpose of AC_PROG_AWK (and AC_PROG_SED and > AC_PROG_*GREP) is to find the _best available implementation_ of these > utilities, not to determine whether they exist at all. Autoconf core > code assumes that all three exist in some form. > >

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Paul Eggert
On 2025-04-17 09:46, Simon Josefsson wrote: I don't think it's worth making a distinction here between Autoconf and "Autoconf + Automake", since most packages that use Autoconf also use Automake. I would appreciate distinguishing this, it helps to make it more clear where dependencies are coming

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Eric Blake
On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 08:31:08AM +0200, Simon Josefsson via Gnulib discussion list wrote: > Hi > > I got a CI/CD build failure [1] for libidn on the new release fedora 42. It's not just Fedora 42; OpenSUSE did the same back in last August: https://gitlab.com/libvirt/libvirt-ci/-/merge_requests

Re: fedora 42 doesn't have awk: how to deal with autoconf subst?

2025-04-18 Thread Zack Weinberg
On Thu, Apr 17, 2025, at 7:31 AM, Simon Josefsson via Bug reports for autoconf wrote: > Paul Eggert writes: >> On 2025-04-16 23:31, Simon Josefsson via Bug reports for >> autoconf wrote: >> >>> I tried reading through the autoconf manual to see if 'awk' is a run- >>> time dependency for running g