Re: gnustep-make experiment

[Nicola Pero]

>> 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 ?


> I thought the main point was to enable ./configure to test for the
> existence/usability of GNUstep libraries/frameworks.  So shouldn't it be
> installed in into a standard system path instead of
> GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT/Tools?  I would expect /usr/local/bin or whatever
> --bindir is set to for configure of -make.

If GNUSTEP_SYSTEM_ROOT/Tools is not in your PATH, then GNUstep is either
not installed, or completely unusable - and your configure should fail in that
case. ;-)

Thanks

PS: I'll answer the rest of your email later on, I have to catch a flight now, 
just wanted
to make sure we have the discussion on gnustep-config.sh vs gnustep-config 
ASAP. ;-)