Re: [AD] library dependencies...

[Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> It is attached.

Thanks.  But I'd like the one which demonstrates the problem :-)

And what does `allegro-config --libs` output in this case?

> In my experience, Makefile.am is much easier to make changes to than
> Makefile.in. Makefile.am contains all the files you want compiled and a
> few variables where you can set which libraries to link in, as opposed
> to Makefile.in where you have to specify all of the rules as well. In my
> project, which is of comparable size to Allegro, Makefile.am is 296
> lines while Makefile.in is 925 lines.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.  Makefile.in is easy to work with, because 
it's basically already a Makefile.  Is it the case for Makefile.am?  If no, 
is it easy to control the output produced by automake?

> Basically you are doing automake's job yourself. I see that you are
> using autoconf to generate configure, so why not use automake to
> generate Makefile.in?

Personally, I think that one level of automatic processing is fine.  I'd 
start to worry with two.

-- 
Eric Botcazou