Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 07/24/05 18:22 CST: > Hi: > > Is there a reason for regenerating the autotools for sgml-common? The > included configure file worked for me. If we don't regenerate, then we > don't need the automake patch.
===================================================================== Quoted by Tush from LFS-Dev: There is. The internal automake files are installed in /usr/share/aclocal-1.9 and /usr/share/automake-1.9. This is to allow multiple automake versions to co-exist without any conflicts. All other packages install their automake macros into /usr/share/aclocal so that multiple automake versions can find them when running automake. So automake-1.8 would look for macros in /usr/share/aclocal-1.8 and /usr/share/aclocal and automake-1.9 would look for macros in /usr/share/aclocal-1.9 and /usr/share/aclocal. That said, for a by-the-book LFS + BLFS installation it doesn't make much sense to have multiple directories since there is only one version of automake installed. That is the reason I symlink them on my system. ======================================================================= Well, this explains the abnormality in your system versus everyone else's system. In the future, may I suggest you ensure whatever you've done to your system that isn't by-the-book LFS or BLFS be explained before you start a thread for something that "isn't required". :-) (This is meant to be humorous, and nothing more, as we close this thread) -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 00:32:01 up 114 days, 5 min, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.02 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
