GNU bug report logs - #7434
When an incorrect option is used before --help/--version, automake behaviour is inconsistent with that of other GNU programs.

Previous Next

Package: automake;

Reported by: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>

Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 15:30:03 UTC

Severity: minor

Done: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


Message #26 received at 7434 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at> gmx.de>
To: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 7434 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>
Subject: Re: bug#7434: When an incorrect option is used before
	--help/--version,
	automake behaviour is inconsistent with that of other GNU programs.
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:41:08 +0100
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 06:41:20PM CET:
> > Besides, in the particular case of automake, how often do automake
> > or aclocal get invoked directly?  To my experience, they are almost
> > always invoked by autoreconf, ./bootstrap, or some custom autogen.sh
> > script.

(aside: autoreconf works just in the same way as automake in this
respect.)

> > > > Let's address this on bug-standards before changing any programs.
> >
> Now a decision has been reached on bug-standards *not* to tighten the
> specification about the behaviour of --help and --version:
>  <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-standards/2010-11/msg00010.html>

Nor to forbid the current behavior of automake.

> Considering that, do you agree to simplify the automake/aclocal option
> parsing by not trying to process --help/--version options encountered
> after invalid options?

I'm painfully aware that this is a near-bikeshed discussion, but I
simply fail to see the advantage of taking away existing functionality
helpful for the user, even if only a few users.  Code simplification is
nice, but this change wouldn't suddenly make automake fast, all that
much more readable, or anything similar.  Barring that there is a
technical advantage for our users[1], I remain unconvinced.

Sorry,
Ralf

[1] A technical reason would be something like: erroring instead of
warning due to an unknown argument is better because it enables users
to write robust configure tests for arguments.  This doesn't apply here,
of course.




This bug report was last modified 12 years and 335 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.