>>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
adl> 2006-04-20 Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
adl> * m4/amversion.in (_AM_AUTOCONF_VERSION): New macro.
adl> (AM_SET_CURRENT_AUTOMAKE_VERSION): Call it.
adl> * aclocal.in (trace_used_macros): Trace _AM_AUTOCONF_
Hello,
I proposed:
> > > Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated
> > > ./configure.
[plus]
> > $(srcdir)/Makefile.in: $(srcdir)/Makefile.am $(top_srcdir)/configure
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:51:26PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Also, you are munging time stamps behind
* Stepan Kasal wrote on Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:52:31PM CEST:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:03:14PM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> > Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated ./configure.
> > Stepan> (It presents only minimum of extra work.)
> >
> > I don't think it wor
Hello Alexandre,
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 02:03:14PM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated ./configure.
> Stepan> (It presents only minimum of extra work.)
>
> I don't think it works :
>
> - if automake is called by a rebuild rule
>>> "Stepan" == Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated ./configure.
Stepan> (It presents only minimum of extra work.)
I don't think it works :
- if automake is called by a rebuild rule to rebuild one
Makefile.in with
Hello Alexandre,
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 09:12:01AM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> adl> Here is my attempt at checking Autoconf version in aclocal.m4.
...
> Here is a second attempt [...]
...
>* It does not pollute acloc
>>> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
adl> Here is my attempt at checking Autoconf version in aclocal.m4.
adl> It would be nice if someone could suggest a better way to retrieve
adl> the Autoconf version:
Here is a second attempt that I think is superior to the
previous
Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> --- lib/Automake/FileUtils.pm 2006-04-14 09:25:00.0 +0200
> +++ lib/Automake/FileUtils.pm 2006-04-14 09:45:44.0 +0200
> @@ -73,6 +73,9 @@
>$optional = 1
> if $file_name =~ s/\?$//;
>
> + return "-"
> +if $file_name eq "-";
Hello,
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 08:52:48PM +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> Or can we tweak Autoconf to make its version more accessible?
what would be wrong with parsing `autoconf --version' or
`autom4te --version'? (At least as a fallback, when autom4te is
not able to handle stdin.)
echo
| The patch to add AC_PREREQ to AM_PATH_LISPDIR is necessary not to
| prevent the failures Noah described, but simply to prevent users from
| trying to use the macro with an Autoconf version that is too old and
| does not cause `${datarootdir}' to be defined.
I was merely explaining why aclocal co
10 matches
Mail list logo
