Re: 1.1.2: GNU make required.

[Alexandre Oliva <oliva at dcc dot unicamp dot br>]

On Feb 23, 1999, Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com> wrote:

>   In message <oryalq3mve.fsf@araguaia.dcc.unicamp.br>you write:
>> Kind of, you have to point --build-dir to a build tree where
>> dependencies have been dropped already, and --srcdir-name should be
>> the name used to refer to the srcdir from the build dir, so that
>> #included dependencies are made relative to $(srcdir), not
>> /home/law/egcs-src/texinfo/...  :-)

> Hmm.  I would be more comfortable if you did this and checked it in.  I
> don't want to screw it up.

Will do.

>> Unless there has been some update in the texinfo tree in the trunk, it
>> would probably be easier to just copy the Makefile.ins.

> I believe there have been some changes.  So I don't think this is
> particularly safe.

Ok.  I found out that the only changes that have occurred in the trunk
in the texinfo tree have to do with not installing the built files
(which is a very good thing), so I'd rather just merge the changes
from the trunk.

There's only one change I'm not sure whether to merge:

1999-01-21  Gerald Pfeifer  <pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at>

	* Makefile.am (SUBDIRS): Include util again in order to generate
	install-info.
	* Makefile.in: Rebuild.

The problem is that Gerald's patch did not include dependencies
information in util/Makefile.in.  I'd rather update
texinfo/util/Makefile.in in the trunk, then merge the whole thing into 
the branch.  Is that ok?


BTW, should I update configure et al for autoconf 2.13 and automake
1.4?  automake 1.4 refuses to use the current configure.in, suggesting 
that some AM_... macro names are deprecated and AC_... must be used
instead.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva  http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva  aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil