>>>>> "edward" == edward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
edward> On systems with make programs which delete intermediate
edward> targets (including cygwin), I expect pr19 to fail with foo.c
edward> not found.
I thought we circumvented this by emitting dependencies so that
intermediate files weren't deleted. Do we not? Maybe I'm really
confused... it's happened before.
edward> On cygwin itself, there is an additional problem due to the
edward> "make clean" test failing. foo.exe isn't removed
edward> properly. That can be fixed by putting AC_EXEEXT into
edward> configure.in
Yes, this is a real problem. The test suite should probably be
required to use AC_EXEEXT. Bummer. Could you submit a PR about this?
edward> i suppose lang_*_rewrite should at least check for
edward> noinst/check targets before pushing into dist common, similar
edward> to what happens in am_install_var. that's a separate issue
edward> though =)
I don't agree. I think where something is installed is orthogonal to
whether it is built. It makes perfect sense to distribute noinst_ or
check_ sources. It also makes sense not to, sometimes. That is why
we introduced the dist_ and nodist_ prefixes.
Tom
