On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Ralf Corsepius<address@hidden> wrote:
* On 03/08/2010 12:12 PM, Steffen Dettmer wrote:
I'm trying to understand the motivation for renaming configure.in
to configure.ac. If I remember correctly it was related to the
fact that ./config.status or whoever else processes .in files.
The reason is suffix rules:
*.ac's are processed by "autoconf" (written in the "autoconf-language")
ok, let me rephrase my question:
What was the motivation to change the name of the main file to be
processfrom by autoconf to .ac?
There are many other files processed by autoconf, such as macro
include files. I looked to a few examples in
http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf-archive but all I picked
were called file.m4 not file.ac (which is fine of course!).
Do we have to expect in future to see a renaming here too?
*.in's are arbitrarily formated, arbitrarily formated files.
Is the renaming configure.in to configure.ac cosmetic only
No (cf. above)
Sorry, I didn't get it. Above I understood that it is cosmetic
only (by some convention because configure.in isn't arbitrarily
formated but written in the "autoconf-language", it should be
called configure.ac), so the answer here should be `yes',
shouldn't it?