I am opening a bug to keep track of this. Mathieu Lirzin writes: > Paolo Bonzini writes: > >> On 31/10/2016 13:30, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> If Automake does not see LT_SUPPORTED_TAG, it assumes an old libtool >>> that does not know about AC_REQUIRE_AUX_FILE. However, if the program >>> does not use Libtool's configure.ac macros this check gets a >>> false positive. Do not require ltmain.sh if no Libtool macro is >>> found in configure.ac. >>> >>> Libtools that are not stone-age are already covered by LT_SUPPORTED_TAG >>> and _LT_AC_TAGCONFIG, but add AC_PROG_LIBTOOL just in case for Libtool >>> up to 1.4. >> >> This patch was never applied. >> >> Paolo >> >>> 2016-10-31 Paolo Bonzini >>> >>> * bin/automake.in ($libtool_bundled): New. >>> (handle_libtool): Do not require libtool files if libtool is >>> not being bundled. >>> (scan_autoconf_traces): Set $libtool_bundled. Trace >>> AC_PROG_LIBTOOL too. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini >>> --- >>> If the patch is accepted I will send an Autoconf patch to >>> preselect AC_PROG_LIBTOOL. >>> >>> Since this is a bug, it would be nice to add it at least to >>> the 1.16 branch. >>> >>> bin/automake.in | 12 +++++++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > I haven't tested this, and I am not a Libtool expert so I trust your > analysis. > > What do you think of adding a test ensuring that ltmain.sh is not > required when no Libtool macro is found? > > I have attached a updated patch with trivial formatting and comment > changes. Here is the current version of the patch which needs a test to be merged.