[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Two confusing problems
From: |
John Levon |
Subject: |
Re: Two confusing problems |
Date: |
Fri, 27 Jul 2001 02:19:38 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.19i |
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 05:46:29PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> If you sent him the output of `make dist' then he doesn't need to run
> autogen (which I assume runs aclocal, autoconf, and automake). `dist'
> generates something ready to use. He can just run `configure'.
he is another developer though, and therefore needs to do this - he's not just
compiling up (I'm aware of make dist, it's my favourite feature next to
distcheck ;)
> Beyond that, his automake is too old. He must upgrade.
this is what I wanted to know, thanks.
> Offhand I couldn't say.
> Mixing libtool verisons like this is probably a bad idea anyway.
I don't see I have much choice if I want people to be able to compile a
make disted tarball with different libtool versions. I didn't realise
things weren't compatible for users of make disted tarballs.
I had trouble locating information on exactly what the minimum requirements
were for :
1) users wrt libtool
and
2) developers wrt all the autotools
> John> 2) automake doesn't scan for AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, so it's kind of
> John> hard to not use the deprecated form ???
>
> I don't recall offhand, but that might be a problem with 1.4.
> He should upgrade automake.
this occurs in p4 as well, at least for me (I upgraded in an attempt to fix
this bug, didn't work)
> You can use AM_CXXFLAGS. This will probably do what you want.
>
> This question is a FAQ. I bet the autoconf macro archive, or the
yes, sorry, the last was a late night stupidity
thanks
john
--
"I'd rather be rudely informed than politely left in the dark."