On Thursday, September 7, 2006 @ 10:09a, Ralf Wildenheus wrote: > You could just invoke a different rule then, or something like > make AUTORECONFFLAGS=--force > > (and put $(AUTORECONFFLAGS) in your rule). Surely that > still requires you to know just _when_ the system's > autotools were upgraded. Not always easy to find out, > with automatic package updates and the like... but then > again, autotools really do expect that you do consciously > upgrade in your packages (e.g., read the NEWS entries of > the upgraded tools). You're right. As well, I think I only need to run autoreconf once to create the configure script. Once I've run the configure script, I depend on the generated Makefile to "do the right thing". If this is true, it doesn't matter whether I run autoreconf with -fvi or just -vi. Seems like my helper Makefile would be more helpful if I ran autoreconf -vi just before executing make even if the Makefile has already been generated. I'm not sure what this accomplishes, but it'd be a good place to add AUTORECONFFLAGS to handle autotools upgrades. Thoughts? -DB _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
