Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> The option syntax is awkward due to autoconf's pseudo-requirement >> that such options look like --enable-REMAINDER_OF_NAME=VAL . >> I'd welcome a better name. > > How about --enable-program-FOO and --disable-program-BAR, with the > default being close to what it is now (i.e., enable everything but > programs that won't build, and don't enable 'su' and 'arch')? This > use of --enable* and --disable* fits better into common practice than > --enable-no- does. It might be harder to arrange this on the autoconf > side, admittedly,...
I could go either way on this. I chose --enable-DO_OR_NOT_INSTALL=VAR so that one could add or remove more than one program name with a single option, e.g., --enable-no-install-program=df,hostname,kill,... vs. --disable-program-df --disable-program-hostname --disable-program-kill ... Another point is documenting the options in --help output: With just two program-agnostic option names, the --help description can work for other projects, too. But I suppose I could work around that. But maybe it's not worth the option-name ugliness. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
