Re: gnulib-tool --local-dir question

Bruno Haible <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gnu.m4.patches,gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Eric Blake wrote:
> For an example, with
> just gpl-3.0.texi.diff and version-etc.c.diff, the difference is between:
> 
> --local-dir=local
> local/lib/version-etc.c.diff
> local/doc/gpl-3.0.texi.diff
> 
> or
> 
> --local-dir=local
> local/version-etc.c.diff
> local/gpl-3.0.texi.diff

The latter introduces ambiguities; the developer will wonder to which files
the diffs actually apply. Simon proposes:

> How about:
>
> local/lib_version-etc.c.diff
> local/doc_gpl-3.0.texi.diff
>
> or
>
> local/lib+version-etc.c.diff
> local/doc+gpl-3.0.texi.diff

This is a bit better, but maybe '%' or ':' are better separators.

Generally, I'm not in favour of such a shortcut, because
  - the gain is small, and it's usually better to have just one way
    to achieve a certain functionality rather than two (because each
    of the two will be less well tested than the common way),
  - it doesn't scale; look at a rather populated local directory in [1].

If you want to prepare a patch, I'm not absolutely opposed to it; the
function to modify is func_lookup_file.

Bruno

[1] http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/gettext/gnulib-local/?root=gettext
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.