Re: bootstrap does not pass --force to autoreconf

[Akim Demaille]

Le 28 déc. 2012 à 12:39, "Gary V. Vaughan" <address@hidden> a écrit :

> On 28 Dec 2012, at 18:00, Akim Demaille <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Le 28 déc. 2012 à 10:35, "Gary V. Vaughan" <address@hidden> a écrit :
>>> Salut Akim!
>> 
>> Hi Gary!  Long time no see :)
> 
> Too long! :)

Agreed :)

>> Can't all these bootstraps be merged?  Bison used to have a forked
>> one too, but Joel's and Jim's efforts resulted Bison's using the
>> stock bootstrap now.
> 
> Yes please!  I rewrote bootstrap from the ground up to meet shortcomings
> that prevented gnulib bootstrap from being used by Libtool and M4, and from
> being forked by tar, bison and others.  I studied every other bootstrap script
> I could lay my hands on in the hope that the rewrite would be a strict super-
> set of those.  I believe I succeeded.
> 
> Unfortunately, the result is very large (it has a lot to do!) and with my
> frustration at having spent several months on it, and then not being able
> to find someone with sufficient time to review the monster and push it to 
> gnulib,
> I upset a few important people with my rants :(  So, rather than continue to
> annoy the good gnulib folks with my incessant pestering, I'm simply using the
> rewrite in all my own projects, and helping a handful of other adopters make
> the best use of it.
> 
> I still think that the rewrite is technically superior and much more
> maintainable than the gnulib script, although gnulib bootstrap has definitely
> closed the gap somewhat in the last year or two.  If you'd like to try it 
> out, I
> can update the bison bootstrap.conf I made in 2010 to work with the latest
> git revisions of bison and bootstrap?

If you think there's a chance we could really merge the
efforts, then that would be nice!  What evidence can we
have that it might be accepted this time, or rejected again?