Re: --without-local-prefix Does Not Work

[Jeffrey A Law <law at cygnus dot com>]

  In message <Pine.NEB.4.02.9809131107480.1767-100000@duhnet.net>you write:
  > Why is this a `bug' and why is it so difficult to convince you that some
  > users WANT to keep /usr/local/include out of the include search path?
  > (Myself included.)
local-prefix is and always was supposed to be a pathname, NOT a 
boolean.  As long as you are trying to convince me that it should
be a boolean or conditionally a boolean you are not going to find
a receptive audience.

In fact, the primary motivation behind the change you've been complaining
about was to clarify its usage and prevent unexpected behavior.  One
could argue that "no" should give an error, just like "yes" and I'm
more than willing to change that aspect of the behavior.


  > --with-local-prefix=no is actually a bug, as it runs against the grain of
  > what --with-*=no/--without-* options are supposed to do:  _disable_
  > features.
No.  Not all --with/--without options are supposed to enable/disable
behavior.  Most are booleans to enable/disable behavior, but not all
of them.

jeff