Re: [PATCH] Explain how to define $(AUTOM4TE) to generate `testsuite'.

[Benoit SIGOURE]

On Oct 31, 2007, at 5:13 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

> * Benoit Sigoure wrote on Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 04:43:28PM CET:
> >         * doc/autoconf.texi (Making testsuite Scripts): Here,
> >         with AM_MISSING_PROG.
>
> > I'm not sure about this one.  Actually, as a user, I'd prefer not  
> > to worry
> > with this and do this automagically in AC_CONFIG_TESTDIR, WDYT?
>
> It should work whether Automake is used or not.
>
> > --- a/doc/autoconf.texi
> > +++ b/doc/autoconf.texi
> > @@ -20202,6 +20202,13 @@ Still within @file{configure.ac}, as  
> > appropriate, ensure that some
> >  @code{AC_CONFIG_FILES} command includes substitution for
> >  @file{tests/atlocal}.
> >
> > +You will also need to invoke @command{autom4te} to generate the  
> > testsuite,
> > +so you should add the following invocation to @file{configure.ac}  
> > too:
> > address@hidden
> > +AM_MISSING_PROG([AUTOM4TE], [autom4te])
> > address@hidden example
>
> How about something like this?
>
> @item
> You will also need to invoke @command{autom4te} to generate the
> testsuite, written as @samp{$(AUTOM4TE)} in the example below.
> If you are using Automake, a good way to define it is to add this
> to @file{configure.ac}:
> @example
> AM_MISSING_PROG([AUTOM4TE], [autom4te])
> @end example

True, that's better (once again I forgot that it was possible to use  
autoconf without automake, even though this seems rare).

By the way, AM_MISSING_PROG is undocumented (and thus "officially"  
internal) in automake.  There's an entry in automake's TODO that  
reads "Document: AM_MISSING_PROG", maybe I can propose another patch  
for automake to document AM_MISSING_PROG?

Cheers,

--
Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna
EPITA Research and Development Laboratory

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part