Hi, Thanks for the feedback.
Currently my patch updates getopt but leaves getopt_long and getopt_long_only with old-style declarations, which is inconsistent. I also understand the point about preferring Gnulib replacements rather than continuing to patch local copies. Would you prefer that I send a corrected incremental patch updating all declarations consistently, or instead help move this toward the gnulib-port approach? I'm happy to work in either direction. Thanks, Shubham On Sun, Apr 19, 2026 at 3:59 AM Paul Eggert <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2026-04-18 15:18, Collin Funk wrote: > > It would be nice for GNU make to use more Gnulib stuff, but as Paul > > (Smith) writes in gl/README > > Thanks for reminding me about that. I see two paths forward here: > > 1. Give up on "build.sh" and require users to already have a > decent-enough "make". This is the second option listed in gl/README. > > 2. Do the "git merge --no-ff gnulib-port" mentioned towards the end of > gl/README. Make sure the merge fixes all problems mentioned by Shubham, > along with all problems addressed by Gnulib. > > In the long run, (1) is a better way to go. In the short run (2) should > work. > > If we keep doing (2) we should strive to minimizes the differences > between Gnulib and GNU Make's copies of these files, and not change > these files without first looking to see how Gnulib already fixed the > porting problem (which it probably has). >
