En réponse à Maxence Guesdon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2002 16:11:33 +0200
> Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 04:01:56PM +0200, J?r?me Marant wrote:
> > > I'll choose this one because I don't have to change upstream
> > > Makefile :)
> >
> > Obviously, Maxence, this thread is for you :-))
>
> Hi,
>
> I was away from keyboard this week-end (weel, away from my adsl
> connection ;-).
> I like to keep this dependency because when i modifiy the configure.in
> file, the configure is rebuilt, ./configure is luanched and
> master.Makefile is automatically recreated when i do 'make'.
> A 'touch configure' is the good solution i think.
Yes it is. But the strange part of the story is that configure
is always older than configure.in when you build the snapshot.
Cheers,
--
Jérôme Marant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://marant.org
