Re: autoreconf not passing -I option to aclocal

[Guillaume Rousse]

Stepan Kasal wrote:
> Hello Guillaume,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 03:44:30PM +0200, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
>> [...] aclocal is useful even when you don't use automake, for
>> importing your own macros as in my case, [...]
> 
> I agree with you, ...
> 
>> Anyway, my tests show that [aclocal] is called unconditionally.
> 
> ... and autoreconf agrees with us, too.  ;-)
> 
> In this context, is seems a bit unfortunate that aclocal is
> distributed in the Automake package, but that's the way it is.
> 
> The -I option of autoconf is where the _included_ files are searched
> for.  For example, if your configure.ac contained
>       m4_include([foobar.m4])
> then the -I options specify where foobar.m4 might be found.
> (Though adding  m4_include([ocaml.m4])  to the top of your
> configure.ac might be a usable workaround for your problem, I do
> not think it is ``the right way.'')
> 
> autoheader and autoupdate have the same -I option as autoconf.
> The -I option of autoreconf is corresponding to this -I.
> 
> aclocal's -I option is somewhat different: it specifies the search
> path for *.m4 files with individual macro definitions.
> 
> This explains why we were reluctant to pass autoconf's -I options as
> the -I options to aclocal.
> But I understand it generates much confusion, so it seems we might
> reconsider the decision.  Actually, if we passed the -I options from
> autoreconf to aclocal, would it break anything?  If not, we might do
> it.
> 
> (After all, the aclocal -I option is the only widely popular here.
> Almost noone uses autoconfs -I and -B options, the -I only pops up
> when someone confuses it with aclocal's -I.)
> 
> Opinions from others are welcome.
> 
> At the end, I would like to return to this:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 03:09:39PM +0200, Guillaume Rousse wrote:
>> Eric Blake wrote:
>>> Sounds like you forgot to do
>>> ACLOCAL_AMFLAGS = -I ../autoconf
>>>
>>> in your Makefile.am.
>> I forgot to precise that I'm not using automake...
>  
> Well, the above advice works even if you are not using automake:
> The presence of Makefile.am should not cause problems; autoreconf
> recognizes that you are not using automake because configure.ac does
> not call AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE.  But autoreconf greps Makefile.am for that
> assignment, even in that case.
> 
> I understand it looks ugly, and it might confuse people, though.
> 
> Stepan Kasal
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
> 


-- 
Guillaume Rousse
Projet Estime, INRIA
Domaine de Voluceau
Rocquencourt - B.P. 105
78153 Le Chesnay Cedex - France