Re: CVS libtoolize wants to read unexisting aclocal.m4

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 14 Apr 2004, at 12:10, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> > > > "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <gary@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
>  Gary> On 13 Apr 2004, at 22:07, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> > > Ahem... libtoolize should be called before aclocal, and yet it
> > > tries to reads the file produced by aclocal...
>
>  Gary> It can't run autoconf --trace, and needs to see whether libltdl 
> is
>  Gary> used, where the macro directory is etc.  I think it is okay to 
> look
>  Gary> in aclocal.m4 if it is there, I just hadn't discarded the error
>  Gary> message properly until libtool--devo--1.0--patch-44.
>
> It's probably useful only when aclocal is not used (i.e.,
> aclocal.m4 is handmade).  Otherwise aclocal.m4 will be a
> collection of m4_include from which you won't learn anything.

Yes, and when used in conjunction with automake < 1.8... libtool claims
to support automake >= 1.4p6!!

> I feel it might be worth moving away from the traditional
>
>        fooize  # install foo's macros and aux files
>        aclocal
>        autoconf
>
> to something like
>
>        aclocal --copy # copy system-wide macros locally
>        autoconf
>        fooize         # install only foo's aux files
>
> That way `fooize'-like tools can trace all they want in configure.ac.

In principle I couldn't agree more... infact, I am in the camp that 
wants
aclocal functionality to be rolled in to autoconf, and this is a step in
that direction.

Another good thing that comes of this scheme is that autoconf can 
maintain
all of the macros it uses (in an aclocal-x.y style tree). Bad citizens 
like
libtool and gettext would need to co-operate with autoconf again about 
where
they install their macros, but autoconf could ship a tool that fooize
installers can use to install their macros.

> (Actually the `--copy' thing does not exist yet, but whether the
> macro is inserted in aclocal.m4 or installed in the tree and
> m4_included makes no difference for this scheme.)

Removing the distinction would make for a more robust toolkit for sure!

You have my buy in.  What can I do to help it all happen? (I'll get back
to m4 as soon as libtool enters feature freeze for the next release).

Cheers,
        Gary.
- --
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  gary@{lilith.warpmail.net,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFAfVUVFRMICSmD1gYRAhx1AJ9NJ3S8IjyvCkpTNOFJxVRn/NHsVQCgovZ7
qWXwS2ovK0smHtkQ3qGOdD0=
=Wpk5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----