Hi Marc,
thanks a lot for your assistance. Now I think I understand the point.
It seems like a good solution for the future, however, I don't have
the time to try this right now, and in the short term it doesn't seem
to bring significant improvements, besides allowing me to get rid of
--whole-arc
Hello,
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:55:01AM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Stepan Kasal wrote on Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:40:04AM CEST:
> > > This would silently break lots of `bootstrap' scripts that call
> > > aclocal
> > > automake
> > > autoconf
> >
> > It wouldn't break them, I think,
[ automake-patches dropped ]
Hi Stepan,
* Stepan Kasal wrote on Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 10:40:04AM CEST:
>
> BTW, you said:
> > This would silently break lots of `bootstrap' scripts that call
> > aclocal
> > automake
> > autoconf
> >
> > in that order, instead of the other way. (Remember th
Hello,
I proposed:
> > > Stepan> I would suffice if autoconf, when called in 3) updated
> > > ./configure.
[plus]
> > $(srcdir)/Makefile.in: $(srcdir)/Makefile.am $(top_srcdir)/configure
On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:51:26PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Also, you are munging time stamps behind
