Subject: Re: mk/gnu-config question/request
To: Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai <>
From: Johnny C. Lam <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/12/2005 18:48:10
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> -On [20050612 03:44], Johnny C. Lam ( wrote:
> >On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 01:57:31AM +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> >> Find attached an updated patch with an auto-run target for some autotools if
> >> GNU_CONFIGURE is specified.
> >
> >Why do we want to do this?
> Because it is the only hook I have right now to reasonably rerun the
> autotools in order to update outdated files within a given pkg so that it
> takes benefit of recent changes within the autotools (libtool specifically)
> pkgs.

We've discussed this in the past, and we don't want to ever automatically
run the GNU autotools.  We often patch configure scripts and
files directly since in the past, GNU autotool-generated files have
been highly dependent on having the correct minor version of either
GNU autoconf or GNU automake.

> >I don't understand why this is necessary.  Packages that use libtool
> >to build shared libraries are configured to use the libtool that
> >installed by pkgsrc by devel/libtool-base.
> Yes, and it does and it depends on it and it does not solve the
> problem/issue at hand, which is not building shared libraries.  It's one
> thing to replace 'libtool', it's another for and libtool.m4.  If
> the configure script does not contain some parts of an updated libtool.m4 it
> will never detect to build shared libraries and thus will not build them.

Packages that set USE_LIBTOOL as well as USE_TOOLS+=autoconf will
already automatically have libtool.m4 replaced with the version from
the installed libtool package (see pkgsrc/mk/tools/  If
you want to also replace automatically, could you please
submit a patch against


	-- Johnny Lam <>