Re: [Groff] additions to autoconf files

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > Or that they had X11 but not X11/Xaw/Dialog.h?
> 
> No one complained so far because gxditview is neither compiled nor
> installed so far.  In order to get this running, the tests are
> mandatory.

I think we should trust autoconf -- it provides a macro to test for
X11.  Note that finding the right location of the X11 tree is very
tricky.  IIRC, using the X11 tests of autoconf increases the size of
the configure script by about 30kByte...

> I really missed a test for type `bool' when I rewrote the
> intermediate output parser.  But as God did not want to add a clean
> test I had to plunder around with devilish work-arounds ]:-[

Who is God?  I don't oppose to a test of `bool' (as I've written
recently in another mail).  I opposed to convert all boolean tests in
groff to `bool' by myself since this a very time consuming task which
is mainly done for aesthetical reasons.

> The more with unit32.  It's so illogical, stupid, arbitrary misuse of
> power, guys.

I don't understand what you are complaining here.  Please rephrase.

> Moreover, who the faq urged me to write groffer with those stupid
> ancient plunder shells instead of using nice arrays from bash?

It wasn't me, IIRC.


    Werner