bug#8099: LaTeX and automake

Hello Reuben, * Reuben Thomas wrote on Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:43:51PM CET: > I have just been investigating the state of the art for LaTeX support. > I've just been autotooling up an old build system of mine from 15 > years ago, and needed to build several LaTeX documents of modest > complexity,

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

On 02/26/2011 03:11 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 02:54:09PM CET: Fine with me. This is the additional squash-in -- on the top of the old one, since I had already commited that locally :-( Don't worry, I do such junk commits all the time. You co

bug#7995: [PATCH 1/4] Documentation for Guile support.

Hi Ralf, Ralf Wildenhues writes: > +@example > +guile_GUILE = compiled-and-installed.scm > +nodist_guile_GUILE = not-distributed.scm > +guile_DATA = not-compiled.scm > +noinst_GUILE = compiled-but-not-installed.scm > +dist_noinst_DATA = just-distributed-blob.scm > + > +# object files will be ins

bug#7995: Guile support in Automake

Hi Ralf, Andy already answered most of your questions, I think. Ralf Wildenhues writes: > - The current tests assume _GUILE sources are distributed by default; > OTOH, _LISP are not. Rationale for this semantic difference? In a typical project, 90% of the .scm files are hand-written, and 10

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 02:54:09PM CET: > Fine with me. This is the additional squash-in -- on the top of the old > one, since I had already commited that locally :-( Don't worry, I do such junk commits all the time. You could git diff HEAD@{2} or some similar comman

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

On Saturday 26 February 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 02:08:39PM CET: > > BTW, such kind of checks would be much easier to perform with Paolo's > > pending patch for ACLOCAL_PATH support in place; pointer: > >

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 02:08:39PM CET: > BTW, such kind of checks would be much easier to perform with Paolo's > pending patch for ACLOCAL_PATH support in place; pointer: > Hmmyes, we have a lot

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

On Saturday 26 February 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:45:11AM CET: > > I agree with Jack that advertising the use of LT_INIT would be better, > > since, according to Libtool NEWS file, that has obsoleted AC_PROG_LIBTOOL > > since version 1.9b (2

bug#8104: automake suggests use of AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, this has been replaced by LT_INIT

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:45:11AM CET: > I agree with Jack that advertising the use of LT_INIT would be better, > since, according to Libtool NEWS file, that has obsoleted AC_PROG_LIBTOOL > since version 1.9b (2004-08-29). Yes. There are still 1.5.x users out there, but

bug#8111: after adding a(nother) subconfigure, rerunning make fails

Hi Stefano, * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 09:32:57AM CET: > On Saturday 26 February 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > This is not an Automake bug after all. It can be solved completely > > within Autoconf, thus no new version skew danger. :-) > > > What about checking in your

bug#8111: after adding a(nother) subconfigure, rerunning make fails

Hello Ralf. On Saturday 26 February 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > close 8111 > thanks > > This is not an Automake bug after all. It can be solved completely > within Autoconf, thus no new version skew danger. :-) > What about checking in your automake testcase anyway (obviously to be skipped w

bug#8111: after adding a(nother) subconfigure, rerunning make fails

close 8111 thanks This is not an Automake bug after all. It can be solved completely within Autoconf, thus no new version skew danger. :-) Patch for Autoconf coming up. Thanks, Ralf