Re: problems building stable branch

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Michael Livshin <address@hidden> writes:

> running ./autogen.sh is documented in HACKING.  INSTALL is for people
> who get release tarballs.

Ok, my bad.

> > 13:29:00 appel ~/usr/src/guile/guile-core$ ./autogen.sh 
> > autoheader2.50: libguile/scmconfig.h.in is unchanged
> > automake: no `Makefile.am' found or specified
> > guile-readline...
> > automake: no `Makefile.am' found or specified
> 
> do you really not have Makefile.am in ~/usr/src/guile/guile-core ?

But I do have a ~/usr/src/guile/guile-core/Makefile.am.  Only when I
do
     automake Makefile

it generates Makefile in.  That's why I needed the automake $(find
 -name Makefile.am ...) command.

> the fact that you later succeeded to run configure means that you
> already had Makefile.in files present.

No, that's because I forced automake on all .am's there are.

> what happens when you do a fresh checkout?

That's what I did:

    13:27:27 appel ~/usr/src/guile$ cvs -z3 co -r branch_release-1-6 guile-core

Still, the ice-9 directory depends on it's own guile, which is bad.
Also, the -ldl library flag isn't added automatically.

Btw, I'm running latest debian/unstable (on powerpc).

> --
> Tools that are no good require more skill.

:-) Is that a coincidence?  I still think that automake is a broken
concept, I like LilyPond's stepmake package a lot better.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien       | http://www.lilypond.org