Ralf wrote: > * Harlan Stenn wrote on Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 07:31:17PM CEST: > > > > As I recall, the recommended behavior is to ignore unknown --with[out]-* > > and --[dis]enable-* flags, as a top-level configure script may be > > calling more than one subordinate configure scripts. > > Autoconf 2.62 warns about them by default (quoting NEWS): > | ** Warnings are now generated by default when an installer invokes > | 'configure' with an unknown --enable-* or --with-* option. > | These warnings can be disabled with the new AC_DISABLE_OPTION_CHECKING > | macro, or by invoking 'configure' with --disable-option-checking. > > Presence of AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS also turns off the warning as the > mechanism isn't yet smart enough to know about subdir configure options. Thanks - I wasn't aware of that. I do my best to have NTP (at least) build with the *oldest* possible auto* tools, as there are a lot of folks out there who end up needing to run autoreconf and I catch heat from them if I *require* them to update their toolchains without "good reason". This generally means I have to test my packaging with several different versions of various autotools, but I usually have the "oldest supported" tools on one machine, the "newest" on another, and the "most common middle version" on another, which is usually the machine where I do my packaging. H _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
