[autoconf-conversion] Something to start with

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 04:03:22PM +0200, Bonzini wrote:
> > There are varying levels of conversion we could do.  For instance,
> > "proper" autoconf 2.5x style looks quite different from 2.13 style.
> > I didn't try to do this.
> 
> I think it should be good to move the arguments from AC_INIT to AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR, from
> AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE to AC_INIT and from AC_OUTPUT to AC_CONFIG_FILES, and renaming
> AC_CONFIG_HEADER to AC_CONFIG_HEADERS.  But this can be done at the end.

I agree with the "at the end" part.  I'd like to suggest this method:
  - Rename configure.in to configure.ac in every directory we convert.
    Yes, I realize what this does to CVS history.
  - Post diffs from configure.in to configure.ac instead of a full
    diff.
  - Add an AC_PREREQ(2.57).
  - Make the minimal necessary changes, and we can go pack to prettying
    it up later.  If you look at the unified diff I posted for
    libiberty, the last line is a comment on another macro saying "This
    can be removed with autoconf 2.5x".  Fight the urge, do it later :)

Any objections?

> > In a similar vein I added "1.6" to AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS, to prevent use of
> > earlier versions (I would have used 1.7 but at the moment 1.6 was
> > easier for me to access).  While 1.7 isn't shipped in RHL 9, I still
> > think we should require it and not 1.6.  1.7 has had a lot of bug
> > fixing, plus other enhancements which may actually be useful (in
> > places).

Requiring 1.7 sounds good to me.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer