Reiner Steib <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Sep 29 2006, David Kastrup wrote: > >> I nevertheless checked in the current state so that people can already >> check out whether the manual formats well and consistently for them. >> >> I also have made the versioning in the manual be generated >> automatically via an external file version.texi. The example code >> relies on automake generating this file automatically: as we don't use >> automake, I do it via configure. As a result, I don't know whether >> the format of the information is identical with that generated by >> automake. > > It seems there's something wrong with these changes: My snapshot > script failed this morning. (Sorry, I don't have time to look into it > now.) > > ,---- > | + ./autogen.sh > | echo @set VERSION @AUCTEXVERSION@ >version.texi > | echo @set UPDATED @AUCTEXDATE@ >>version.texi > | makeinfo auctex.texi > | auctex.texi:30: Unknown command `AUCTEXVERSION@'. > | auctex.texi:30: Unknown command `AUCTEXDATE@'. > | auctex.texi:63: Unknown command `AUCTEXVERSION@'. > | auctex.texi:63: Unknown command `AUCTEXDATE@'. > | auctex.texi:82: Unknown command `AUCTEXVERSION@'. > | makeinfo: Removing output file `[...]/doc/auctex.info' due to errors; use > --force to preserve. > | make: *** [auctex.info] Error 1 > | Error running make in doc > `----
Well, the changes are ok for normal use, but the pseudo use of doc/Makefile.in as a Makefile in autogen.sh breaks. I'll try a fix. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
