Re: Alternate automake output?

[William Robertson]

On 23 July 2002, Tom Tromey address@hidden wrote:
| William> Good, except that configuration runs are abysmally slow.
| 
| Have you enabled caching?  That is the first thing I'd try.  It will
| help but won't solve the problem; each configure script has a certain
| amount of unavoidable overhead; your particular configuration
| multiplies this overhead by the number of modules.

Caching definitely helps, but I also agree with the rest...

| William> The sticking point is getting automake, when run from the top
| William> level, to generate something other than a Makefile.in in each
| William> module directory, so the module's local Makefile.in doesn't
| William> get clobbered.
| 
| Just when you think you've heard it all... :-)

Heh, I was afraid you were going to say something like that.

| William> I know this is a hack, but could automake play along with
| William> this, and would this work?  Alternatively, is there a cleaner
| William> way to achieve this goal?
| 
| Well, you could try it.  One horrible thought I had is that you could
| AC_SUBST(AM_MAKEFLAGS) in configure, and set AM_MAKEFLAGS to something
| like `-f OtherMakefileName'.  I don't know if this will work; you
| could give it a try.
| 
| Tom

Thanks for the help, both you and Rob.  I'll see what I can come up
with.

-- 
| William Robertson | GPG:0x90A3BED4 | address@hidden |