Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 16 of 16
Automake is an easy way of generating Makefiles. The developer creates the Makefile.am files, which automake then generates Makefile.in files from, and then as the last step, configure processes the ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578

    Automake is an easy way of generating Makefiles. The developer creates the Makefile.am files, which automake then generates Makefile.in files from, and then as the last step, configure processes the Makefile.in files with the values it has detected on your system to create the actual Makefiles. configure is in turn created by GNU autoconf from the configure.in file. Automake and autoconf are run by the developer, so you don't need them when you're just installing it, but the configure script reads values from your system and puts them into the Makefiles. Then you can run make to actually use the Makefiles.

  2. #12
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    314
    Alright so you write the configure.in file and the makefile.am so automake knows how to make the make files and know where the install directories. So I think the best solution would be to write a program that goes through these file firest or last and writeing either a file or a DB entry.

    If this is totally missing the point tell me so.
    The computer made me do it!! Slackware and SUSE too Gig\'em WHOOOOP!!
    \"God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain amount of tasks, At the rate I\'m going I will never die.\" (I don\'t know)

  3. #13
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578
    Well, the thing is that that could easily become out-of-sync if automake or autoconf were changed in some way. Also, it would mean that I would have to implement the entire automake/autoconf/make cycle into this program. That would be a huge project, whereas adding an extension to the install program could be done in probably a matter of hours if I had known DBM programming, and now a matter of days, since I don't.

  4. #14
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    314
    Well now getting back to your question about reautomakeing all of the files. Every time that I've had to automake I got some waked out error. So I dont know.
    The computer made me do it!! Slackware and SUSE too Gig\'em WHOOOOP!!
    \"God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain amount of tasks, At the rate I\'m going I will never die.\" (I don\'t know)

  5. #15
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Täby, Sweden
    Posts
    7,578
    Precisely. Automake's internals change pretty much between different versions. That's one reason why I wanted to avoid that approach. That was mainly thought to be done when the developer runs automake to generate the Makefiles.

  6. #16
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    314
    After learning a little more about the problem Ive come the conclusion that the best way the fix the proble is to make the program run on top of the other commands. For instanc you call up the intaller program in a gui or text and have it analyze the package and install it for you. I dont know the specifics but given the nature of automake, if you make something out of a month lator it seems to me that it would be useless. But to answer your original question would i be worth your time. I dont think so!!
    The computer made me do it!! Slackware and SUSE too Gig\'em WHOOOOP!!
    \"God put me on this earth to accomplish a certain amount of tasks, At the rate I\'m going I will never die.\" (I don\'t know)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •