Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 10:54:23 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Tim Van Holder cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: RE: Robust shell-based test for DJGPP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Tim Van Holder wrote: > > No, there are complex configure scripts, with several scripts in > > subdirectories, where this causes more breakage. > Could you give a specific example? The more outlandish and/or complex > configure.in's I have, the better I can test my patches. Try the TeX/Web2c distribution. The latest one, not the one we have in v2apps/tex/ (although the subdirectories' stuff exists in the ported version as well). > > Ah, you are talking about the configure script distributed with > > Emacs. It isn't used for the DJGPP build at all, so you don't need to > > bother about it too much. > I've used it to configure emacs without problems for a few versions now, > so there's no need for me not to try out my patched autoconf on it :-) You can try it, but chances are you will get a broken DJGPP build if you do that. The DJGPP-specific configuration batch file and associated scripts deliberately avoid using some of the features which configure would detect and use. > In fact, if I hadn't, I wouldn't have run into the srcdir issue, as I > usually use relative paths as --srcdir. Emacs is not Autoconfiscated (and probably won't be for at least some time), so it is not a very good example as far as the configury stuff goes. And since you are working on DJGPP-specific patches, I don't know how do you test them with Emacs, without having a ``correct'' configure-produced set of files at your disposal.