Re: The inevitable autoconf version question...

[Kaelin Colclasure]

On 1/25/02 3:16 AM, "Nicola Pero" <nicola@brainstorm.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]
>> autoconf: Undefined macros:
>> configure.in:715:AC_SYS_PROCFS
>> configure.in:716:AC_SYS_PROCFS_EXE_LINK
> 
> These 'Undefined macros' warnings are very worrying - I don't get them if
> I run 'autoconf'.
> 
> I believe that the base configure files are a bit dirty, in the sense that
> some code is not in the blessed place it should be ... I didn't have the
> time to clean it yet though.  So in general you need to be quite careful
> about touching as little as possible of the configuration files ... :-)
> running 'autoconf' should be safe, but for example running 'autoreconf' or
> 'autoheader' is not.  Make sure you have all configuration files exactly
> as they are on CVS.  Now edit configure.in.  Now run 'autoconf' to
> generate the new configure.  That should work (you still get the
> AC_TRY_RUN complaints, but you should not get the 'Undefined macros'
> complaints).  Any other more intelligent way of acting might not work :-)

I eventually tried this on my own, and as you suggest it worked fine. I did
later have to run `autoheader' in order to propagate HAVE_POLL to config.h,
but as far as I can tell this has caused no problems. My version of the
`configure' script has a lot of (apparently largely cosmetic) differences
from CVS, though. I would normally attribute this to different versions of
autoconf... Are you also using RedHat 7.2? And also using the "stock"
autoconf from that distro? If not, perhaps one of our machines has a
slightly different version -- say from CVS, or with distro tweaks...

I will be posting my diffs (to the bug list) as soon as I get into the
office today. I will include the deltas to config.h.in and the configure
script, but you might want to elide them and do `autoconf; autoheader'
locally to see if the results are closer to CVS.

-- Kaelin