Josip Rodin wrote: > I've actually been a bit confused by the notion of having separate autoconf > installations/invocation in multiple subdirectories. The point of that would > seem to be that if you just want to reconfigure and rebuild one particular > part, you can do it. > > But who ever does that?
Exactly. > It seems to me that everyone only ever wants a single autoconf instance for > the whole tree, which can generate all the subdirectory makefiles. Ugh. Even better, use a build system which includes header/library checking as part of the dependencies. Waf && others seem to be a good start here. For 2.2.x, I've been looking at getting rid of libtool && libltdl. All modern systems have dlopen(), so that makes things easier. Getting rid of autoconf would be a logical next step. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html