Peter Johansson writes: > On 02/27/2014 11:05 AM, Harlan Stenn wrote: > > Yes, understood. And the problem is that am__configure_deps includes > > am__aclocal_m4_deps, which includes aclocal.m4. > > Inaccurate. am__configure_deps includes aclocal,m4 via variable > $(ACLOCAL_M4). am__aclocal_m4_deps describes which files 'aclocal.m4' > depends on and depending on itself would probably have caused Make to > implode. OK. > > So we have a case where as a result of autoreconf running, aclocal.m4 > > gets updated and config.h.in does not get updated. But the resulting > > directory will require autotools (apparently the 'missing' stuff is > > insufficient) because make*will* force a rebuild of config.h.in because > > aclocal.m4 is newer. > > Correct. Are you saying that these time-stamps get propagated to a > distribution tarball. If so, it smells like the 'make dist' target could > get improved??? I'm saying that with the MAINTAINER_MODE stuff being different, now that "missing" is no longer used by default there is a case where auto*'s dependency rules for aclocal.m4 still require an autoheader run *after* autoreconf has been run, and that seems to me to clearly be a bug. H _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
