> -----Original Message-----
> From: edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 12:47 PM
> To: Robert Collins; Akim Demaille
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: program target missing $(EXEEXT)
>
>
> here is the current situation as i see it. some apps like gcc
> can manage
> .exe by themselves. others like "install" handle .exe differently in
> specific cases. others like "rm" don't handle .exe at all
> (and shouldn't).
> automake deals with this by explicitly adding .exe (basically
> everywhere).
>
> however, downstream development utilities like libtool
> *expect* the .exe to
> *not* be explicitly tagged in the Makefiles. having .exe
> breaks libtools
> usage of scripts to wrap applications which need a loader
> hint (for dll
> path). unfortunately, creating a script called foo.exe wreaks havoc on
> windows systems, at least. which try to load it (kids don't
> try this at home
> :)
Isn't there a _SCRIPTS primary _for scripts_. That doesn't get $(EXEEXT)
added to it at all. Perhaps the wrong target was being used?
>
> so, what do all you automake peeps suggest?
>
> cheers,
> edward
>
