No, I don't think it'd be that common that they change, but various minor fixes could nevertheless be nice to get automatically. It should be weighted against the cost (and will) to implement a way to recover, and it seems fairly simple to do it. I don't know how far Marek got in actually doing it, though.
Anyway, I think it's clearly better to have a system that avoids manual duplication than one that don't.
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2002-09-30 23:06: Subject: Autoconf macros and aclocal
Do you think that's a real problem? The macros distributed with version foolib-1.17 ought to work with some older and later foolib versions (e.g by the popular method of invoking some foo-config program).
If a later version of foolib makes incompatible changes to the detection mechanism so that the old macros won't work, that can be dealt with just like other incompatible changes in the library which happen from time to time.
And if foo-config compatibility breaks a lot more often then foo-compatibility in general, then the natural conclusion is that the advertised m4 macros are broken and one's probably better off writing one's own macros.
/ Niels Möller ()