On 2007-02-11 05:00:20 -0800 Nicola Pero
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I like the idea of your patch, so I rewrote the shell script and
committed
it.
Minor nit... isn't gnustep-config.sh meant to be executed, not
sourced?
So shouldn't it be named gnustep-config instead of gnustep.config.sh?
Yes, it is meant to be executed, not sourced. Not sure what
implication
that does have on the '.sh' at the end of the name though.
Maybe omitting the '.sh' would allow us more freedom in the future,
eg,
to replace the script with a compiled binary if we ever need ?
Any suggestions/comments on what the best name is ?
definately prefer gnustep-config for the above reasons
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
