[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Libtool 1.4.3
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: Libtool 1.4.3 |
Date: |
10 Oct 2002 11:27:02 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Honest Recruiter) |
| > You want autoconf -f then.
| -f, --force consider all files obsolete
|
| We do a ./cvsclean right now for autoconf +2.50 which purges
| all generated data. I guess that is basically the same.
|
| > You know, you are typically the kind of people who has valid grieves
| > against Autoconf, but using things that were never documented.
|
| You have lost me. Why should autoconf document any valid m4
| command?
Because Autoconf is not M4! Because such a large framework must make
provisions precisely so that the whole architecture work. Ans esyscmd
is teh best example of what cannot be kept.
| > esyscmd is definitely excluded from our framework.
|
| Then you need to document that. Neither 2.13's nor 2.54's
| autoconf.info says anything to that effect.
OK. I agree that
| Programming in M4
| *****************
|
| Autoconf is written on top of two layers: "M4sugar", which provides
| convenient macros for pure M4 programming, and "M4sh", which provides
| macros dedicated to shell script generation.
|
| As of this version of Autoconf, these two layers are still
| experimental, and their interface might change in the future. As a
| matter of fact, _anything that is not documented must not be used_.
is not clear enough, it seems to refer to M4sugar and M4sh only. And
| Changed Macro Writing
| ---------------------
|
[...]
| If you were doing tricky things with undocumented Autoconf internals
| (macros, variables, diversions), check whether you need to change
| anything to account for changes that have been made. Perhaps you can
| even use an officially supported technique in version 2 instead of
| kludging. Or perhaps not.
is hidden.
| > But you kept developping your Autoconf instead of coming and
| > deciding for a solution.
|
| I cannot parse that sentence.
Sorry :) I mean, when you clear hit a limitation of a tool,
contacting the developper of the tools will certainly provide a better
solution that doing something on your side.
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, (continued)
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Stephan Kulow, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Earnie Boyd, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Sascha Schumann, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Akim Demaille, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Sascha Schumann, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Akim Demaille, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Sascha Schumann, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Paul Eggert, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Thomas E. Dickey, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Bernd Jendrissek, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Pavel Roskin, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Sascha Schumann, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Robert Boehne, 2002/10/08
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Akim Demaille, 2002/10/09
- Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Paolo Bonzini, 2002/10/09
Re: Libtool 1.4.3, Paolo Bonzini, 2002/10/09