Hi Ralf. Thankyou for your prompt response to my two queries last week. I think I have solved my own problems. One of the problems was that I had defined the variable ; INSTALL = install -c -m 644 in one of my Makefile.am files. The reason I did this was because I was trying to implement an install-pdf target in the generated Makefiles. However it now appears that Autoconf 2.61 and Automake 1.10 generate this target automatically. Am I correct when I say that older versions of the Autotools did not generate install- style targets automatically? Also, your remark about AC_PROG_LIBTOOL being a third party macro helped solve my other problem. For some silly reason I always thought that this macro was part of Automake package. After I told aclocal where to find the AC_PROG_LIBTOOL, the problem was solved Thanks once again for your help. It appears as though my knowledge of Autoconf and Automake isn't as good as I thought it was. - Craig Sanders Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues@xxxxxx> wrote:> > Hello Craig, > > * Craig Sanders wrote on Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 09:26:50AM CEST: >> >> I have just installed automake 1.10 and autoconf 2.61 on my system. I >> am able to successfully run aclocal, autoconf and automake on my >> package. The resulting configure script that is created runs without >> any errors when I invoke it from within the build directory. However, >> when I run make in the build directory, I get the following messages >> (amongst others) ; >> >> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/craig/source_code/c++/build/nana' >> make[1]: *** No rule to make target '-c', needed by 'all-am'. Stop. >> make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/craig/source_code/c++/build/nana' >> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > > Please post the Makefile.am in question and configure.ac. Are you using > the variable DATA in your Makefile.am? You shouldn't be, although I can > see that the Automake manual doesn't make this too clear. > >> Have I done something wrong or has something changed in the latest >> version of the Autotools that I should know about? Admittedly I did >> need to make some small changes to my package's configure.ac file, >> because autoconf complained when I ran it. Should I maybe have posted >> this message to the autoconf mailing list instead? > > I replied to your other problem. Fix that first, then let's see about > this one again, it might be a followup one. > > Cheers, > Ralf _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
