Last patch I'd like to go in 2.60

2003-12-03 Thread Paolo Bonzini
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2003-11/msg00075.html fixes the longstading (dates back to the beginning of the CVS repository) failure to use the third argument of AU_DEFUN. Maybe given the problems with 2.58 it would be good to distribute Automake 1.8 and Autoconf 2.60

Desired feature

2003-12-03 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
It would be useful if Automake supported a set of options (e.g. LDFLAGS) which are applied only when building libraries or when building programs. It is excessively painful to have to add per-target _LDFLAGS options. Perhaps there should be both 'LT' and non-'LT' macro versions. Certainly this

Re: Status of non-recursive automake

2003-12-03 Thread John Darrington
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:38:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Does src1/foo.c exist? Yes. Are you using Automake 1.7.9? No. I was using 1.7.6 and it seemed that atl_SOURCES=src1/foo.c works fine with this version. So presumably the underscore thing was introduced between

Re: Status of non-recursive automake

2003-12-03 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, John Darrington wrote: On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:38:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: Does src1/foo.c exist? Yes. Are you using Automake 1.7.9? No. I was using 1.7.6 and it seemed that atl_SOURCES=src1/foo.c works fine with this version. So presumably

Re: [MAD SCIENCE EXPERIMENT]: Replace some libtool functionality with handcoded C

2003-12-03 Thread Alexandre Oliva
On Dec 3, 2003, Mohan Embar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wanted to see how much faster the libgcj build would go if I took libtool out of the picture for some of the pieces. I'm not all that surprised your C program is much faster that the shell script. For starters, it fails to support all of