Re: bug#30126: Do not require “ltmain.sh” for out-of-tree libtool

2018-02-20 Thread Mathieu Lirzin
Hello, Mathieu Lirzin writes: > Mathieu Lirzin writes: > >>>>From a936b7d4cf8583ace0be6756b4b066a2c1aebe18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Paolo Bonzini >> Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 13:30:50 +0100 >> Subject: [PATCH] automake: Do not require ltmain.sh for o

Re: bug#30126: Do not require “ltmain.sh” for out-of-tree libtool

2018-01-15 Thread Mathieu Lirzin
Hello Paolo, Mathieu Lirzin writes: >>From a936b7d4cf8583ace0be6756b4b066a2c1aebe18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Paolo Bonzini > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 13:30:50 +0100 > Subject: [PATCH] automake: Do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool > > If Automake does not

Do not require “ltmain.sh” for out-of-tree libtool

2018-01-15 Thread Mathieu Lirzin
found? > > I have attached a updated patch with trivial formatting and comment > changes. Here is the current version of the patch which needs a test to be merged. >From a936b7d4cf8583ace0be6756b4b066a2c1aebe18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paolo Bonzini Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 13:30:50 +01

Re: [PATCH] automake: do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool

2017-10-17 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 17/10/2017 13:45, Mathieu Lirzin wrote: >>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > I haven't tested this, and I am not a Libtool expert so I trust your > analysis. > > What do you think of adding a test ensuring that ltmain.sh is not > required when no Libtool macro is found? > > I

Re: [PATCH] automake: do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool

2017-10-17 Thread Mathieu Lirzin
hat do you think of adding a test ensuring that ltmain.sh is not required when no Libtool macro is found? I have attached a updated patch with trivial formatting and comment changes. >From a936b7d4cf8583ace0be6756b4b066a2c1aebe18 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paolo Bonzini Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 13:30:50 +01

Re: [PATCH] automake: do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool

2017-10-12 Thread Mathieu Lirzin
Hello, Paolo Bonzini writes: > On 31/10/2016 13:30, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> If Automake does not see LT_SUPPORTED_TAG, it assumes an old libtool >> that does not know about AC_REQUIRE_AUX_FILE. However, if the program >> does not use Libtool's configure.ac macros this check gets a >> false posi

Re: [PATCH] automake: do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool

2017-10-12 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 31/10/2016 13:30, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > If Automake does not see LT_SUPPORTED_TAG, it assumes an old libtool > that does not know about AC_REQUIRE_AUX_FILE. However, if the program > does not use Libtool's configure.ac macros this check gets a > false positive. Do not require ltmain.sh if no

[PATCH] automake: do not require ltmain.sh for out-of-tree libtool

2016-10-31 Thread Paolo Bonzini
If Automake does not see LT_SUPPORTED_TAG, it assumes an old libtool that does not know about AC_REQUIRE_AUX_FILE. However, if the program does not use Libtool's configure.ac macros this check gets a false positive. Do not require ltmain.sh if no Libtool macro is found in configure.ac. Libtools