Akim Demaille writes:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> | I could split it into four or five patches (that would be
> | incrementally applied) e.g:
> |
> | 1) gcc style cpp depcomp
> | 2) patsubst style variable substitution
> | 3) suffix supplied dependencies
> | 4) improved suffix rule recognition
> | 5) per target built source hooks.
> |
> | I would be willing to add tests for new features (so long as this
> | didn't result in the patch being rejected for being big <g>)
>
> Do you still consider doing this?
>
> | If I was to do this, would someone with CVS access consider applying
> | them in a timely manner? I suspect I might go mad trying to maintain
> | five source trees for any length of time.
>
> I would. Well, we the approval of some other people, of course, but
> we'd do that quickly. In addition Automake is not changing fast
> enough to become a problem :)
Akim,
I've been busy on other things for a while, but I would definitely
like to get these patches in, and I am heartened by the application of
my depcomp patch :)
I'll see if I can get the patsubst patch out next week.
Cheers,
Alex.
