* Rusty Ballinger (rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) [001010 20:20]:
> On Oct 10, 8:37am, Joshua Rodman wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [rhino] Newbie foolish build question
> > * Joshua Rodman (jrodman@xxxxxxxx) [001010 13:56]:
> > > jrodman@Athenae:~/storage/rhino/sysadm_base-1.3.6 >aclocal
> > > aclocal: configure.in: 149: macro `AM_PROG_LIBTOOL' not found in library
> >
> > Okay, it seems AM_PROG_LIBTOOL changed to AC_PROG_LIBTOOL in some point
> > along the history of automake/conf.
>
> What point, do you know? I think AC_PROG_LIBTOOL is provided by libtool
> (/usr/share/aclocal/libtool.m4, maybe somewhere else on your system), but
> AM_PROG_LIBTOOL is an automake macro. What version of automake are you
> using? (And you do have libtool installed, right? I assume you must if
> you have AC_PROG_LIBTOOL.)
Looking inside my copy of automake (argh perl..)
it seems that this macros is somehow handled.
However, as above, it's aclocal which dies, and does not know how to
handle it.
So many things are possible at my current rudementary understanding of
these tools.. including
1) my aclocal is broken
2) the README.maint in the rhino dist is in error suggesting to run
aclocal first
3) I'm missing something in my automake configuration
4) the configure.in shoudl be using AC_PROG_LIBTOOL
.. lots of other possibilities exist.
I'm a bit frustrated that, out of the can, the source distribution tries
to run autoheader from a ./configure; make. I can't believe this is
desirable. Is there a fix which is trivial for you here?
I feel that a delievered tarball should not require, nor try, to use any
of the suite of autotools unless the consumer does something especially to
request their activation.
-josh
--
Source code, list archive, and docs: http://oss.sgi.com/projects/rhino/
To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe rhino | mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx
|