This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

What is the blessed version of autoconf/automake?


Michael Meissner writes:
 > What is the prefered version of automake, autoconf, gettext, and libtool for
 > the binary utilities these days?  In README-maintainer-mode it mentions that I
 > should use the special version of the tools in sourceware.cygnus.com (which I
 > probably should submit a patch because cygnus.com doesn't exist anymore).  With
 > this version of the tools, I get:
 > 
 > 	configure.in:8: AC_TRY_COMPILE was called before AC_ISC_POSIX
 > 	configure.in:8: AC_TRY_RUN was called before AC_ISC_POSIX
 > 	autoconf: Undefined macros:
 > 	***BUG in Autoconf--please report*** AC_FD_MSG
 > 	***BUG in Autoconf--please report*** AC_FD_CC
 > 	***BUG in Autoconf--please report*** AC_FD_MSG
 > [...]

How come bfd/aclocal.m4 has this:

---
dnl aclocal.m4 generated automatically by aclocal 1.4-p5

dnl Copyright (C) 1994, 1995-8, 1999, 2001 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
---

whereas if I download
ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/binutils/automake-000227.tar.bz2
I get an aclocal that has:

---
dnl aclocal.m4 generated automatically by aclocal 1.4

dnl Copyright (C) 1994, 1995-8, 1999 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
---

If I generate aclocal.m4 with the aclocal from automake-000227.tar.bz2
and then use the autoconf from autoconf-000227.tar.bz2 I get the
above errors.

However, if I throw that aclocal.m4 out and get a fresh copy,
autoconf runs just fine and creates a configure script with
no differences from the checked-in copy (yay!).

Will the real aclocal please stand up.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]