Re: Why do I need both AC_INIT and AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE??? (fwd)

[Eric Siegerman]

----- Forwarded message from Bob Proulx <address@hidden> -----

> I just looked at the docs for 1.7.3 and the following was in the
> example section. [...]
>      AC_INIT(src/hello.c)
>      AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE(hello, 1.3.11)

----- End forwarded message -----

Here's a patch to clarify the situation.  I've refrained from
re-line-wrapping, to make the diff more readable (a little
more, anyway; there's a fair bit of shuffling things about).

I would have updated the "GNU Hello" example to 2.1.1 myself, but
there's a lot of cryptic goo in its configure.ac, and I wasn't
sure how much should be stripped out for clarity, vs. left in for
pedantry :-)  1.3.11 is not available at ftp.gnu.org (and
probably never was, judging by the thread fragment starting at
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/bug-automake/2000/msg00077.html), so
I couldn't compare its vanilla configure.in with the hacked
example in automake.info.


2003-04-08  Eric Siegerman  <address@hidden>
        
        * automake.texi (Public macros): Clarify that the new
        AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE variant is preferred, and the old one
        deprecated.
        Copy-edit the rest of the AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE item.
        * (Hello): Caution that the example uses the deprecated
        AC_INIT/AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE syntax, and xref to the discussion.

--

|  | /\
|-_|/  >   Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont.        address@hidden
|  |  /
My Wine works.  However it crashes about half the time on startup.
Apparently their simulation of windoze API is getting too accurate.  :)
        - Kyle Sallee

automake.texi-patch
Description: Text document