> This is not necessary, since it is a "simple" one line command that I use > about once a year in the *rare* case that there is no Makefile and > no ./configure.
The command "autoreconf" belongs to the autoconf tool chain. I imagine that it is safer to use than the call of the make target "configure". Would you like to give more software developers and configurators the opportunity to regenerate the configuration script on their own by this command? > If by the above, you are talking about the autoconf system, no, we don't want > to waste any time with changes to the autoconf system except what is > *absolutely* necessary, fixes a bug, or adds a specific new feature. How many adjustments will still be needed because of obsolete constructs? http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/autoconf/Obsolete-Macros.html > That said, at some point, we are going to switch from the GNU autoconf tools > to cmake. However, this will not happen until cmake is a "standard" package > on more systems. I am curious when the move to the tool "CMake" will become feasible for further improvements in your software project. Regards, Markus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list Bacula-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
