Subject: Re: Automake 1.4l released
From: Christopher Faylor <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:48:44 -0400

On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 08:40:18PM -0500, Raja R Harinath wrote:
>Christopher Faylor <[email-masked]> writes:
>[snip]
>>As you are not overly familiar with Cygwin, I'm not very familiar with
>>automake.  I know that autoconf bends over backwards to accomodate
>>older OSes.
>
>Not really, in the sense you mean.  'autoconf' requires GNU m4 and perl
>on the maintainer side -- not really bending over backwards.
>
>It is the generated 'configure' that bends over backwards to accomodate
>older/non-traditional OSes.
>
>>I don't know what automake does.
>
>'automake' has a similar policy.  The maintainer of a package needs a
>reasonable system.  The generated Makefile.in can be used on
>older/non-traditiona OSes, as long as the user doesn't invoke any
>maintainer rules.
>
>'make distcheck' is a maintainer rule, since it checks if the
>distribution tarball generated is complete.

Ok.  I'm really really sorry that I even responded to this thread.  I
really should have done more homework before shooting off my mouth.

I'll let everyone else hash this problem out.  It doesn't sound like
this is a show stopper for either automake or cygwin, anyway.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/