Lars Hecking wrote: > The distribution package was built with autoconf 2.61 indeed, but why > should that affect me so? Is the only possible fix to recreate the > distribution with an older autoconf (>= 2.54)? So you're building from a "dist" tarball, and not a cvs/git/svn checkout? If that's the case then the version of autotools that you have installed (as well as any version requirements of the package) should not matter at all, as nothing should need to be regenerated. The dist tarball is supposed to be standalone and not require any auto* on the enduser system. The fact that make thinks it needs to run autoheader means that either the timestamps were not preserved (using nfs? used cp without -p?) or it's not a proper "dist" tar. In either case you can try running "autoreconf -fvi" which will rerun aclocal to regenerate aclocal.m4 among other things. But it would probably be good to figure out why the timestamps are not correct. Brian _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
