On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 04:13:09PM +0100, Egil Kvaleberg wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-01-22 at 13:05, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > 2.53 works. Could you please setup a correct AC_PREREQ(2.50)
> Done.
> But presumably, you do not need autoconf at all to do a straight
> configure and build?
Yes, but I had to play with configure.in myself.
>> and
>> rename configure.in to configure.ac?
> Have done that too, although reluctantly so since it is then not so easy
> to follow CVS diffs. Is there a good reason why configure.in cannot be
> retained?
I am happy with just AC_PREREQ, feel free to make a re-rename.
I think you know more about autoconf than me, I suggested the
renaming because configure.ac seems to be the prefered filename:
| Previous versions of Autoconf promoted the name `configure.in',
| which is somewhat ambiguous (the tool needed to produce this
| file is not described by its extension), and introduces a slight
| confusion with `config.h.in' and so on (for which `.in' means
| "to be processed by `configure'"). Using `configure.ac' is now
| preferred.
cu andreas
--
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurl fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message has been sent to you because you are subcribed to the mailing
list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To remove yourself from this lists, send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] containing "unsubscribe newsx <your_email_address>"
in the message body.
