Wireshark · Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS

[Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello David,

I know it's a synonym, and I know the autotools guys push for it, and 
I'm all for it, but...
We have to have an idea what we break, on any of the platforms Wirehark 
is build for, if we do this.
So therefore my question how far back this symbiotic existence of 
INCLUDES and CPPFLAGS goes.

Thanks,
Jaap

On 2013-03-11 12:00, David Arnold wrote:
> On 11/03/2013, at 8:10 AM, Jaap Keuter wrote:
>
> Hi Jaap,
>
> > ref bug 8452.
> >
> > When did autotools started to use AM_CPPFLAGS, which are now 
> > favorable over
> > INCLUDE? Do we break anything with this cleanup?
>
> (I submitted the bug)
>
> The automake documentation says:
>
>   INCLUDES
>   This does the same job as AM_CPPFLAGS (or any per-target
>   _CPPFLAGS variable if it is used). It is an older name for
>   the same functionality. This variable is deprecated; we
>   suggest using AM_CPPFLAGS and per-target _CPPFLAGS instead.
>
> On that basis, I believe they're synonyms, and the automake folks are
> pushing everyone towards the AM_* style variables.
>
> I see the annoying logspew using OSX with MacPorts and
> automake-1.13.1 (and I *think* on Debian/testing as well, but that box
> is inaccessible right now, so I cannot confirm that).
>
> I've updated the bug,
>
> d