>>>>> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> I'm not sure I agree with that. It sounds perfectly
Alexandre> reasonable to me to have automake request for the user to
Alexandre> add AC_PROG_RANLIB to configure.in.
I agree. In fact the whole problem is to keep things ordered.
Automake has two existences : its .m4 being, and its .in body. By
nature the .m4 incarnation cannot depend on configure.in itself. Up
to now configure.in is a source file and as such, under the
responsibility of the maintainer. The .in product though, does depend
upon configure.in.
It is a sloppy road to have Automake read configure.in to make
decisions, then update it, then reread it for the .in etc. etc.
I agree with Mo the behavior would be nice, and IIRC, there was a
recent example where this would have been cool too, but it would
require dramatic changes in the logic of the whole system. I don't
think Autoconf + Automake would support such a paradigm.
Fortunately, the changes you have to handle by yourself are rare, and
(normally) only once for all.
