libcpp's aclocal.m4 regeneration question. Also is it time for a toplevel "m4" directory?

[Paolo Bonzini]

 >>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.
 >
 > Yes, I think that would be a good move.

Another nice project would be to use aclocal also in directories that do 
not use Automake.

While I agree that splitting macros across several files would be a good 
move, I do not see how it would reduce the size of aclocal.m4 (aclocal 
1.8.5 already uses m4_include for .m4 files *within the tree*) and, 
especially, of configure scripts.

Zack: I'm working on the libcpp Makefile now.

Paolo