Re: autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Thien-Thi Nguyen
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Maintenance should really include upgrading to the current version of autoconf. that's probably something a maintainer decides, hopefully w/ some input from the users. Is there any VMS support in the older version that is missing in the current

Re: autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Roger Leigh
Thien-Thi Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >From: Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 09:31:43 -0500 (CDT) > >Autoconf 1.12 is an anchient legacy version dating from eight years >ago. The current Autoconf is 2.59. If no one responded, it was >probabl

Re: SUBDIRS: can I make but not install?

2004-04-27 Thread Gregory Sharp
--- Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> "Gregory" == Gregory Sharp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes: > > Gregory> My program uses a 3rd party library, that I include > with the > Gregory> distribution as a subdirectory. > > Gregory> I want to build the library, and statically li

Re: autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Thomas Dickey
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > > > i posted the following to the autoconf list: > > > > http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2004-04/msg00131.html > > > > but perusing the archive shows that list is mostly full of (other) > > junk

Re: autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Thien-Thi Nguyen
From: Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 09:31:43 -0500 (CDT) Autoconf 1.12 is an anchient legacy version dating from eight years ago. The current Autoconf is 2.59. If no one responded, it was probably because your request was similar to proposing a design

Re: autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote: > i posted the following to the autoconf list: > > http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2004-04/msg00131.html > > but perusing the archive shows that list is mostly full of (other) > junk, hence this post, in case autoconf maintainers have decided

abidjan

2004-04-27 Thread Sheri Bush
Conner,: Save 95% for all Viagra/Cialis/Levitra. http://www.HIJKAM.BIZ/ES001/?affiliate_id=233635&campaign_id=404 cardamom,more than anything.

autoconf 1.x for vms maintainership request

2004-04-27 Thread Thien-Thi Nguyen
i posted the following to the autoconf list: http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2004-04/msg00131.html but perusing the archive shows that list is mostly full of (other) junk, hence this post, in case autoconf maintainers have decided to avoid that list. thi

Re: install-sh path, differs?

2004-04-27 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On Mon, 2004-04-26 at 22:38, Paul Elliott wrote: > Newbe quesion: > > Before creating the tarball for my project, I do the following: > > autoheader > touch NEWS README AUTHORS ChangeLog > touch stamp-h > aclocal > autoconf > > automake -a > > Then I want to let my users do .configure ; make ;

Re: install-sh path, differs?

2004-04-27 Thread tomas
On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 12:28:20AM +0200, Alien9 wrote: > don't know the official position, but i made a file in my CVS that's called > autogen.sh > > and that does: > aclocal > autoheader > autoconf > libtoolize -c --automake > automake -a -c Yes, only I call this bootstrap.sh (autogen