Re: Why <config.h> and not "config.h" ?

[Stefan Monnier]

> I think this was discussed recently, and I seem to recall that the
> reason given was that "config.h" doesn't work if the user tries to build
> with an out-of-tree object directory _after_ having previously built in
> the source tree (without an intervening "make distclean" in the source
> dir).

Actually, I'd be happy to have a recipe to reproduce the problem.
This way we can fix it in the Makefile, so that the choice between the
two becomes "irrelevant", rather than being based on "avoid a poorly
understood problem in some rare corner case".


        Stefan