> Looks like a good idea. It appears to work identically. Do you have experience
> with it? What are the pro's/cons's of
> automake --add-missing --force-missing --copy
> versus
> (cd build-aux && rm -f ar-lib compile depcomp install-sh mdate-sh missing
> test-driver)
> automake --add-missing --copy
> ?
Well, they don't work identically:
* (cd build-aux && rm -f ar-lib compile depcomp install-sh mdate-sh missing
test-driver)
automake --add-missing --copy
does mostly what I want. Except that it doesn't upgrade build-aux/ylwrap -
which is easy to fix.
* automake --add-missing --force-missing --copy
has two drawbacks:
- It overwrites INSTALL with the generic one that uses archaic `quoting' and
lacks the reference to the DEPENDENCIES file.
- it overwrites build-aux/{config.guess,config.sub,texinfo.tex} with files
that are older than the ones that we got from gnulib.
In other words, the solution with 'rm -f' allows us to select which files
automake won't upgrade. Whereas the solution with '--force-missing' behaves
as if maintainers would never have any reason to have their own INSTALL
files, and if there was never a newer version of texinfo.tex than in automake.
Bruno
