home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!eng.umd.edu!djm
- From: djm@eng.umd.edu (David J. MacKenzie)
- Newsgroups: gnu.utils.bug
- Subject: Re: Autoconf 1.3 - M4 include directive
- Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:07:08 -0500
- Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
- Lines: 20
- Sender: daemon@cis.ohio-state.edu
- Approved: bug-gnu-utils@prep.ai.mit.edu
- Distribution: gnu
- Message-ID: <199301251731.AA03490@frob.eng.umd.edu>
- References: <9301221131.AA28456@life.ai.mit.edu>
-
- > Was there any good reason for undefining the include M4 builtin?
-
- Yes -- someone wanted to put some text like "-I/fubar/include" in configure.in,
- but GNU m4 was eating the word "include".
-
- > Groff 1.06 uses it, and I've been using it in my geeks package; I
- > can't see what harm it could do, and it makes the configure.in file
- > much neater.
-
- The aclocal.m4 files (autoconf looks for one in libdir and one in the
- current directory) should be a sufficient replacement, at least for
- what groff does.
-
- > I'm know virtually nothing about M4, and don't want to, so my two
- > basic questions are: 1) is there a good reason to disable include in
- > Autoconf, and 2) if so, is there any other way round it?
-
- If you really want to use include still, you can access it via the "builtin"
- macro.
-
-