autoconf (was: Re: portability questions)

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jan 10, 1999, Raffaele Sena <raff at aromatic.com> wrote:

> 	I'm not very familiar with autoconf/automake, but, even after
> 	updating to the latest CVS sources I had to change configure.in
> 	as following to avoid an error in autoconf (complaining about
> 	PACKAGE and VERSION missing - or something like that - in
> 	/usr/local/share/autoconf/acconfig.h).

autoconf couldn't have complained about it, only autoheader could, and
only if you do have autoheader from autoconf 2.12.2 or 2.13.  If not,
it shouldn't have even tried to run autoheader (as long as you have
some very recent modifications to the top-level configure script, to
avoid running outdated versions of auto* tools)

> 	The change (deducted from one of the automake tests) made it
> 	working.

This can't have affected anything at all.  The best it may have done
is to force auto*-generated file to be rebuild, rebuilding any other
file that had been previously broken.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva  http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva  aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil