[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name.
From: |
Akim Demaille |
Subject: |
Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name. |
Date: |
06 Feb 2001 16:39:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.1 (Crater Lake) |
Pavel Roskin <address@hidden> writes:
> > Tom, you should also know you can have a special exception, and tell
> > autoconf AM_INCLUDE is OK. But I agree with Pavel it looks way too
> > much like a macro name, in itself it is confusing.
>
> As far as I know, it cannot be done without breaking compatibility with
> Autoconf 2.13.
>
> Too bad Autoconf doesn't provide (offically at least) any means for
> writing macros conditionally for particular versions of Autoconf.
ifdef.
> This feature may be useful for Automake and other tools working
> together with Autoconf, as well as for any packages installing m4
> files (gettext, GTK+, gnome-libs).
>
> I mean something like
>
> AC_VERSION_CASE(
> [<=2.13], [test "$FOO" = yes && tmp=foo; AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS([$tmp])],
> [default], [test "$FOO" = yes && AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS([foo])])
Don't go that way! AC_PREREQ.
- AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Pavel Roskin, 2001/02/05
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Akim Demaille, 2001/02/05
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Pavel Roskin, 2001/02/05
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name.,
Akim Demaille <=
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Alexandre Oliva, 2001/02/06
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Akim Demaille, 2001/02/07
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Alexandre Oliva, 2001/02/07
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Akim Demaille, 2001/02/07
- Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Pavel Roskin, 2001/02/07
Re: AM_INCLUDE is a bad name., Tom Tromey, 2001/02/05