On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 19:20:50 -0500, Jameson Graef Rollins <jroll...@finestructure.net> wrote: > > Your commit message has that flag word of "also" in it, and as it turns > > out, the removal of Makefile.config from the repository has actually > > happened already. But that was easy enough to fix. > > I was thinking that the removal of the Makefile.config from the repo > went together with the new auto-generation of that file from configure > script. Do you think they still should have been separate patches?
No, it was fine. It's just funny to me how often that word "also" in a commit message seems to end up being a predictor for things later, (like this case where half of a patch is already implemented, or much worse, how often a bisect lands on a commit that makes multiple changes). So I was really just expressing amusement at seeing it again. > > > +# option parsing > > > +for option; do > > > + if [ "${option%=*}" = '--prefix' ] ; then > > > + PREFIX="${option#*=}" > > > + fi > > > +done > > > > I've gone ahead and committed that now. Then I noticed that we should > > really use ${option%%=*} to support the case of an option value > > containing an '=' character. So I fixed that. > > Ah, good catch. Sorry about that. No worries. I was just impressed at the tiny amount of code needed for the parsing here, so ended up looking closer to understand it. > Autoconf terrifies me, so I agree I'm quite happy with the simple > configure script we have right now. If it gets the job done without > having to deal with autoconf then that's great in my book. Cool. At least not everyone thinks I'm crazy then. That's encouraging. :-) -Carl
pgplDoLzToHyz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list notmuch@notmuchmail.org http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch