On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 04:26:40PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Patrick Welche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't the long term goal aclocal must be subsumed into autoconf? What
is preventing this from happening sooner rather than later?
I never really understood why one would want to use
I've seen conflicting advice about how to handle extra macros, whether
developed locally or from the archive. What's the best way to get them
into configure? I think this reduces to the question of how to make
aclocal aware of them.
1. AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR doesn't work, according to prior posts
RB == Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RB 5. The autoconf manual has no index entry for aclocal. There is one for
RB aclocal.m4, and the text refers to aclocal. Is aclocal deprecated?
aclocal is part of Automake, not autoconf. The Automake manual
documents aclocal and explains how to
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 21:38 +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
RB == Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RB 5. The autoconf manual has no index entry for aclocal. There is one for
RB aclocal.m4, and the text refers to aclocal. Is aclocal deprecated?
aclocal is part of Automake, not
On Thursday 01 December 2005 9:10 pm, Ross Boylan wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 21:38 +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
RB == Ross Boylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RB 5. The autoconf manual has no index entry for aclocal. There is one
for RB aclocal.m4, and the text refers to aclocal.
Patrick Welche [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Isn't the long term goal aclocal must be subsumed into autoconf? What
is preventing this from happening sooner rather than later?
I never really understood why one would want to use aclocal rather than
m4_include with separate .m4 files unless one was
