On Saturday 25 October 2008 01:13:50, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > Anything I'm missing preventing me from applying this as obvious?
> 
> Yes, I think we should be consistent.

Thanks for confirming.  I've checked it in.

On Saturday 25 October 2008 02:58:05, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 05:13:50PM -0700, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > The thing I don't get is why we don't translate free->xfree, though.
> 
> I think the sed rule predates our copy of xfree.

Yeah, from the ChangeLogs it seems so.

Also, free is a word that easilly can appear anywhere.  Most notably:

 "This program is xfree software"  :-)

Don't think it matters anywhere else, though.

We also have have things like,

 obstack_free

The attached seems to work OK in all cases here.

Do we want this ?

-- 
Pedro Alves