[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_PROG_YACC question
From: |
David Coquil |
Subject: |
Re: AC_PROG_YACC question |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Oct 2001 11:18:11 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Mon, Oct 08, 2001 at 08:17:01AM +0200, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> > Can't tell. What surprises me is that I haven't found it anywhere in the
> > files of my 2.13 binary package, but still autoconf doesn't complain about
> > it when it sees it :).
>
> That's because it's a shell variable, not a macro.
Ok I should have known better than posting this late at night, as it
obviously results in dumb sentences :(
> What's more, it's a shell variable set by _automake_, not autoconf.
As I pointed in a previous post, it is however set in m4/missing.m4 in
autoconf 2.52 source tree, so it should be possible to use it with plain
autoconf I suppose. missing.m4 also defines AM_MISSING_PROG. I agree though
that the names of these macros sound very automakeish :)
> You'll need to call
>
> AC_CHECK_PROGS(YACC, byacc yacc 'bison -y', [AM_MISSING_PROG(yacc)])
>
> instead of using the undocumented, unsupported, internal am_missing_run
> variable. Then run aclocal to pull in the macro definitions needed.
> Note that this _may_ require a recent automake (1.5 recommended).
ACK
--
David Coquil
- AC_PROG_YACC question, David Coquil, 2001/10/05
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Bob Proulx, 2001/10/05
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, David Coquil, 2001/10/07
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Bob Proulx, 2001/10/07
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, David Coquil, 2001/10/07
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Bob Proulx, 2001/10/07
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Tim Van Holder, 2001/10/08
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question,
David Coquil <=
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Tim Van Holder, 2001/10/08
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Bob Proulx, 2001/10/09
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Akim Demaille, 2001/10/10
- Re: AC_PROG_YACC question, Akim Demaille, 2001/10/10