Re: autoconf.h.in and friends

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't autoconf.h.in used by autoheader?

Also the squid one has a bunch of comments on the #defines... if it is generated by autoheader... are those comments recreated in
toto? I don't see the new options I've added to configure.in come across automatically.

Rob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Danilov Nikita" <NikitaDanilov@Yahoo.COM>
To: "Roger Venning" <r.venning@telstra.com>
Cc: <squid-dev@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2000 12:33 AM
Subject: Re: autoconf.h.in and friends

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> Roger Venning writes:
> >
> > Hi people,
> >
> > I recently started development based on the sourceforge CVS "HEAD"
> > branch. I was unable to get compilation of the unchanged(?) tree on
> > my box due to the lack of sane defines as autoconf.h.in and friends
> > were missing.
> >
> > Looking at the CVS changelog stuff, it seems they have been
> > intentionally removed. What's the story with this? My solution
> > was to copy the most recently existing versions back into my
> > tree... :-(
> >
> > Can a kind informed soul out there put me right?
>
> I removed include/autoconf.h.in from tcp_async branch because this
> file can always be regenerated by autoheader (part of autoconf
> package), but I thought it still exists in other branches.
>
> >
> > Roger.
>
> Nikita.
> - --
> Mail me: NikitaDanilov@Yahoo.COM Web me: http://nikita.w3.to
> PGP: B4DBBD61 4B B8 7B 9D E8 66 04 69 CB BC 76 8F AB 8A 57 02
> These subjects can be expresses neither in brief nor in French. // Hegel
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3i
> Charset: noconv
> Comment: Hello, Echelon!
>
> iQCVAwUBOi+RkguKNXy0271hAQHKuQQAgqV5ijz51rdrYSIzKoLFp0bISbEYHTMv
> kefZsjCMtJbygB/6bs/RDtmOyahJ5czf3/dogxgaK3dG5hBAroHm3RixrUAnLv34
> U5/AD4Do4xEMf5HlsGPn1VUjj08ZIZZzJhOrlVWhSl2m0TGB+gpzxyU23rdUgN5d
> 8C1bnrGAtwg=
> =bxj0
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Received on Thu Dec 07 2000 - 07:12:31 MST