Re: What is the blessed version of autoconf/automake?

[Doug Evans <dje at transmeta dot com>]

Hans-Peter Nilsson writes:
 > On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Doug Evans wrote:
 > > If I generate aclocal.m4 with the aclocal from automake-000227.tar.bz2
 > > and then use the autoconf from autoconf-000227.tar.bz2 I get the
 > > above errors.
 > 
 > Just another me-too here.  I've signalled this issue before but
 > given up, so I just find+touch all aclocal.m4 after an update
 > and luckily hasn't had to *really* regen aclocal.m4 yet.
 > 
 > Wishful thinking has it that it'll all be solved with the
 > automake flag day that's been discussed.

Excellent.  More sufferers. :-)

I wonder if someone who uses automake-0002227.tar.bz2 and
autoconf-000227.tar.bz2 could

cd src/bfd
aclocal
autoconf

and either report that it didn't work when they expected it would,
or if it does work send me the resultant aclocal.m4.

If the automake flag day is seriously just around the corner,
don't bother.  But if it still a ways off or unknown when, I'd kinda
like to get this fixed.

Maybe the solution is to just put a copy of the automake
that has aclocal 1.4-p5 somewhere on sources.redhat.com,
(since that's what some people are using).
Perhaps not in the same place if ya don't want to upset
the applecart before the flag day, but at least we'd have
a recommendation to those suffering with this.
grepping */aclocal.m4 I see a mixture of aclocal 1.4 and 1.4-p5.
aclocal 1.4 _does_ work in src/gdb.
If aclocal 1.4 really does not work in src/bfd
then perhaps we need to stop recommending people use it
or at the very least indicate where it does and doesn't work
so people don't waste time on it.

I tried automake-1.4-p6.tar.gz from ftp://sources.redhat.com/pub/automake.
It works but there's lots of differences (which one can live with
of course).