Hello,
I proposed:
> > > Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated
> > > ./configure.
[plus]
> > $(srcdir)/Makefile.in: $(srcdir)/Makefile.am $(top_srcdir)/configure
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:51:26PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Also, you are munging time stamps behind `make's back.
yes, this convinces me that Alexandre's patch is the right way to go.
(FWIIW, I read his (second) patch, and I think it is good.)
Have a nice day,
Stepan
BTW, you said:
> This would silently break lots of `bootstrap' scripts that call
> aclocal
> automake
> autoconf
>
> in that order, instead of the other way. (Remember that was the order
> in which autoreconf-2.13 called them; [...]
It wouldn't break them, I think, it would only slow them down.
During the first `make', automake would update all Makefile.in's and
the build would continue. But yes, it wouldn't be nice.
_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
