Re: Autotools; new versions

[Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd at yahoo dot com>]

Christopher Faylor wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 02:45:48PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2001 at 02:22:53PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> >> >Since there are incompatibilities between
> >> >  autoconf-2.13 and autoconf-2.5x
> >> >  automake-1.4  and automake-1.5
> >> >
> >> >and most (cygwin-external) projects have been slow and/or resistant to
> >> >migrate to the newer versions,
> >> >
> >> >and cgf doesn't want to "push the envelope" on autotools from cygwin
> >> >(let other projects migrate FIRST, then we follow)
> >> >
> >> >and libtool/autoconf/automake must all share the same prefix (usr or
> >> >usr/local or...)
> >>
> >> Robert suggested that debian has a wrapper that tries to infer which
> >> version of autoconf to run.
> >>
> >> Is this something worth considering?
> >
> >Yes.  But I think the requirement for separate install prefixes still
> >remains.  I don't know much about debian, tho, so take that with a large
> >chunk of salt.
> 
> I was thinking that we'd somehow have one autoconf.tar.gz which had both
> versions and a magic wrapper to handle them.
> 

I see the magic wrapper being nothing more than reading the configure.in
or configure.ac to get the AC_PREREQ value and creating the appropriate
symlinks to the correct versions before executing the tool.  BTW, I just
looked at the configure.in in newlib and the AC_PREREQ value is already
2.5.

Earnie.

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com