On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If autoreconf doesn't work for some project, then we'd like to know why,
> so we can fix it. It really should be used.
This isn't really what you asked, but it would be nice if autoreconf
knew about gtkdocize, intltoo
The reason autoreconf runs autoconf before autoheader is that the former
typically gives better error messages than the latter. autoheader
before automake helps avoid a message from automake about missing
config.h.in.
Yes, I saw that in the autoreconf sources. I think it would be
Hi Karl,
* Karl Berry wrote on Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 12:39:21AM CET:
>
> I've been using aclocal - autoheader - automake - autoconf for years,
> but have no idea any more where I got that ordering. I see that
> autoreconf runs autoconf before autoheader, and ah before am, so I
> suppose this is i
Hi Karl!
Karl Berry wrote:
> I've been looking through the manuals and code, but not finding a
> definitive answer: is there a canonical/recommended ordering of running
> the autotools, including automake?
I really like the encapsulation offered by 'autoreconf'.
Bob
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry) writes:
> I've been using aclocal - autoheader - automake - autoconf for years,
> but have no idea any more where I got that ordering. I see that
> autoreconf runs autoconf before autoheader, and ah before am, so I
> suppose this is it:
> aclocal - autoconf - autohe
I've been looking through the manuals and code, but not finding a
definitive answer: is there a canonical/recommended ordering of running
the autotools, including automake?
I've been using aclocal - autoheader - automake - autoconf for years,
but have no idea any more where I got that ordering. I
