On 9/17/2010 1:30 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Charles Wilson wrote on Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 06:28:46PM CEST: >> OK to push? > > OK. Why the s/system/platform/ changes though? I see that > libtool.texi uses platform a lot, and also uses system quite a bit but > not quite as often. Other GNU documentation I think prefers system > however. Or are you trying to make a distinction between both terms?
Yes, the GNU Build System is already mentioned (with an xref to the definition in another manual). It refers to the whole autoconf/automake/libtool process flow, as distinct from imake or scons or whatever. IMO, using 'build system' to refer to the $build platform could be confused with that term. If other GNU documentation uses the same phrase to mean two different things, that doesn't mean we should do so as well. > In that case, they should probably be defined somewhere (and I'd venture > to say that they are not good terms to try to differentiate, because > most users will not think there could be a difference). We don't have a choice; the GNU Build System has already been given that name by others, and we can't change that. Our only choice is whether to use a term that could be confused with it: 'build system' or not. I say not, whenever possible -- but I'm not doctrinaire about it. I'm not about to go thru all of libtool.texi with a red pen, changing 'build system' everywhere I see it...but to_host_file_cmd and to_tool_file_cmd are so similar -- and defvar'ed so close together, that I thought they should use similar terminology. -- Chuck
