[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: config.guess comments from our sysadmins

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: config.guess comments from our sysadmins
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 20:12:09 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

Hello Ed,

Let's keep the mailing list in Cc:, you ask important questions.

* Ed Hartnett wrote on Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 07:22:40PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:
> > * John Wohlbier wrote on Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 04:12:57PM CEST:
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that Autoconf is not in charge of the files, but
> > address@hidden is.
> But autoconf comes up with this file from somewhere, does it not?

They are also distributed as part of the Autoconf source tarball.
But the copies that are put into your source tree typically came
from a 'automake --add-missing' or a 'libtoolize -c' you once issued
(the former may be invoked through autoreconf), and those use their
installed copies of those files.

> Is it part of the autoconf distribution? Or is the config.guess
> somehow installed everywhere? 

Usually part of the installed Automake and Libtool files.  Some
distributions (e.g., Debian) have separated the two config.* files out
in a separate package, to make it easier to keep all copies updated.

> If this is shipped with autoconf, are the updated config.guess and
> config.sub files used in autoconf 1.60?

All autotools source packages usually ship with up-to-date files; but
since the last Automake release has been a while, that's the most likely
bugger to hit you.

It's safe to just replace the two files with newer versions; I think you
should keep the two in sync though.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]