Hello, Akim!
> > ?EXEC?insexec-data-am: install-info-am
> > ?!EXEC?install-data-am: install-info-am
By the way, it will be nice to have a test that actually fails in absense
of insexec-data-am or install-data-am.
> Still, this bug can be easily detected by automake. But @FOO@ bugs
Maybe it's not necessary to check the output since the user is highly
unlikely to use ?FOO? in Makefile.am. I understand it's an internal
mechanism for Automake, not exposed to users.
However, an optional check would be appropriate. It could be turned on in
the testsuite.
> are harder since we share @ with AC_SUBST. I would really love to
> use %FOO% instead in Automake. Tom, what do you think? This would
> make it possible for automake to check what it outputs.
Are you suggesting AM_SUBST?
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
