[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES
From: |
David Fang |
Subject: |
Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES |
Date: |
Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:28:31 -0500 (EST) |
> Is this what you meant? Admittedly, I'm sure how to use a
> stamp-file in this case (I've only hacked my own stamp schemes for
> completely different situations in Makefiles).
Sorry, last post should've read:
I'm UNSURE how to use a stamp-file in this case...
David Fang
- AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, David Fang, 2005/12/12
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/12/15
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, David Fang, 2005/12/17
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Ralf Corsepius, 2005/12/19
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Harlan Stenn, 2005/12/19
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Bruce Korb, 2005/12/19
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/12/19
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Bruce Korb, 2005/12/19
- Re: AC_CONFIG_HEADERS vs. AC_CONFIG_FILES, Ralf Corsepius, 2005/12/19