[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why do I need both AC_INIT and AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE??? (fwd)

From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz
Subject: Re: Why do I need both AC_INIT and AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE??? (fwd)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:37:13 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.090016 (Oort Gnus v0.16) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux)

Hi Eric,

>>> "Eric" == Eric Siegerman <address@hidden> writes:

 Eric> Here's a patch to clarify the situation.  I've refrained from
 Eric> re-line-wrapping, to make the diff more readable (a little
 Eric> more, anyway; there's a fair bit of shuffling things about).

 Eric> I would have updated the "GNU Hello" example to 2.1.1 myself, but
 Eric> there's a lot of cryptic goo in its, and I wasn't
 Eric> sure how much should be stripped out for clarity, vs. left in for
 Eric> pedantry :-)  

Each time I see this section in the manual, I think it would be
better replaced by our own tutorial.

 Eric> 2003-04-08  Eric Siegerman  <address@hidden>
 Eric> * automake.texi (Public macros): Clarify that the new
 Eric> AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE variant is preferred, and the old one
 Eric> deprecated.
 Eric> Copy-edit the rest of the AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE item.
 Eric> (Hello): Caution that the example uses the deprecated
 Eric> AC_INIT/AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE syntax, and xref to the discussion.

Thanks a lot, I've checked it in on HEAD and branch-1-7.

BTW, bug-automake@ is a deprecated interface to submit
patches, automake-patches@ is the modern one... :)
Alexandre Duret-Lutz

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]