[Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sep 23, 2003, at 2:07 PM, Todd Sabin wrote:

> Well, the errors caused by the missing x11-declarations.h were the
> first errors.

You didn't indicate that was the case, so I didn't know that was the 
case.

> Your comment about not wanting to see errors caused by earlier errors
> seems curious to me.  My understanding is that make -k only trys to
> (re)build things for which all dependencies have succeeded.  So, it
> shouldn't generate build errors caused by earlier build errors.

By "earlier build errors" I meant errors earlier in the *SAME* "make 
-k" run.  If one step in the build is supposed to produce a file used 
by a later step in the build, the first step fails to build that file, 
but "make" continues rather than stopping, because it was run with 
"-k", and the later step would fail if the file that was supposed to be 
built by the first step is missing, the failure of the first step will 
most definitely cause a build error in the later step.

> You did "make ethereal" immediately after configure?  Not "make" or
> "make all"?

Sorry - I hadn't noticed that it was specific to making individual 
targets.

Fixing this would probably require some time spent reading the Automake 
documentation to see if there's a "right" way to handle this or if we 
just have to add dependency rules.