This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libcpp's aclocal.m4 regeneration question. Also is it time for atoplevel "m4" directory?
- From: neroden at fastmail dot fm (Nathanael Nerode)
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, kcook at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:07:32 -0400
- Subject: Re: libcpp's aclocal.m4 regeneration question. Also is it time for atoplevel "m4" directory?
Kelley Cook wrote:
>Also now that we are moving to automake 1.9, shouldn't we be split out all the
>extra macros we use into individual files within a toplevel m4 directory as
>the automake people recommend? The generated aclocal and configure would
>become very small if we were to follow that advice.
We spell that directory "config/". :-)
Yes, any m4/autoconf macros used in more than one directory probably belong in
files in config/.
--
This space intentionally left blank.