Re: Can't `make install' Autoconf 2.53b if makeinfo is missing + an OSF make issue

[Alexandre Duret-Lutz]

>>> "Paul" == Paul Eggert <address@hidden> writes:

 >> From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz <address@hidden>
 >> Date: 28 Jul 2002 22:05:28 +0200

 >> Actually I think Automake should simply output
 >> this rule if it is needed (i.e. if the user don't use `.info').

 Paul> That sounds like a win, if Automake can determine that.

I've started a patch for this (and for PR/168 at the same time).

 >> Automake could _warn_ about `.info'-less info files if you say
 >> this is obsolete.

 Paul> The Texinfo manual says "an explicit `.info' extension is preferable,
 Paul> [but] some operating systems cannot handle long file names.... The
 Paul> subfile name `texinfo.info-10', for example, is too long for old
 Paul> systems with a 14-character limit on filenames".  I think such
 Paul> filesystems are obsolete these days, which is why I think that
 Paul> .info-less files are obsolete.

Besides, checking whether the `.info' extension should be used
is the main reason why Automake needs to scan the Texinfo source
(looking for @setfilename).  This prevents Automake to support
generated Texinfo files (that don't exist with automake is run).
If we deprecate `.info'-less files now, we can stop scanning
Texinfo files in the future.
-- 
Alexandre Duret-Lutz