configure.in vs. configure.ac (Re: RFA: Add Epiphany newlib &?libgloss port)

[Corinna Vinschen]

On Nov  8 09:14, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 November 2011 07:03:54 Jim Meyering wrote:
> > Joern Rennecke wrote:
> > > Quoting Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net>:
> > >> Using the "configure.in" name rather than "configure.ac" is really
> > >> anachronistic.  Better to switch to the latter (it's been 10 years),
> > >> if only to avoid making people wonder which version of autoconf you
> > >> require. It will probably avoid some warnings, too, for those who
> > >> enable them.
> > > 
> > > All the autoconf template files in newlib and libgloss are named 
> > > configure.in . If I add a port with confiure.ac, it'll be the odd one
> > > out.
> > 
> > I didn't realize that.
> > 
> > I volunteer to rename them.
> > Would anyone object?
> 
> i wouldn't :)
> -mike

It's a bit tricky to rename files in a CVS repository and keep the
history of changes intact in a usable form.  If nobody cares much 
for the history of the configure files, I have no problems with
renaming them.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat