Re: fix libtoolize scan of non-m4_include style aclocal.m4 [libtool--gary--1.0--patch-38..39]

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 11:09:31AM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Sep 01, 2005 at 03:45:03AM CEST:
> >
> >>Okay to commit to HEAD?
> >>
> >>       * libtoolize.m4sh (func_scan_files): When searching for
> >>       evidence of Autotools in aclocal.m4, be careful not to trip
> >>       over  requires and defuns.
> >
> >It makes things better than they are now.  But as the search does not
> >extend over m4_include()s, for example, it's quite fragile still, don't
> >you think?

> I guess we could do a depth first search of m4_{,s}include to build up
> the list of files that goes through the sed expression?  That shouldn't
> be too hard.  If you agree, I'll add it to my ToDo list...

Just as libtool.m4 and ltdl.m4 may not be present yet or may be present
but outdated, but may be m4_included by the user, you cannot assume that
other macro files are all present and uptodate at the time libtoolize is
run.

> >No, I don't know how to fix it right; maybe allow the user
> >to give the correct answer himself?

You still don't like this, do you?  Fixing up over a broken libtoolize
that tries to be smart but wrongly, is bound to be more difficult than
having the developer do the right thing once in his autogen.sh/bootstrap
script.

Cheers,
Ralf