Automake vs. autoheader: config.h.in

[Paul D. Smith]

Hi Tom et. al.:

I'm working on a trivial doc to include with GNU make that gives the
exact steps to build it from a clean checkout.  I based the algorithm on
what autoreconf uses, but I can't use autoreconf (mainly due to
gettextize issues).

So, autoreconf basically proceeds in this order: gettextize, aclocal,
automake, autoconf, autoheader.

The problem I have is that I have no config.h.in file of my own.  So,
until the last step (autoheader) there is no config.h.in file in my
directory.  This means that when automake is run as the third step, it
complains about a missing config.h.in (which isn't so bad), and it
doesn't add config.h.in to the list of common DISTFILES (which _is_ so
bad).

So, my question is is this a problem with autoreconf in that autoheader
should be run earlier?  Or is it a fundamental circularity in the
toolchain, and we just need to run one or the other twice (probably run
autoheader before automake, then run it again after autoconf to pick up
any changes autoconf made, for example)?

Or should I ignore the whole problem and add config.h.in to my list of
explicit extra dist files?

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist