>>>>> "Roger" == Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Roger> in Makefile.in, is it safe to use this format in my own .in files (e.g. Roger> po/POTFILES.in), or will the format used for the conditionals in .in Roger> files change at a future date? What I need to do is have lines Roger> conditionally included, as some are conditionally distributed. Conditionals don't work they way you seem to think they do. The @FOO_TRUE@ is rewritten to either `' (empty string) or `#' (make comment) by configure. No line is omitted from the generated Makefile. My recommendation is not to rely on the implementation of conditionals. It isn't something we have ever documented. We might actually change it at some point; for instance we might be able to get better performance from config.status if we change how conditionals are implemented. Roger> if COND Roger> FOO Roger> BAR Roger> BAZ Roger> else Roger> BAD Roger> endif I read this example but I don't understand how it differs from what we already do. Right now you can enclose all kinds of stuff in a single conditional. What you can't do is have a conditional that starts or ends in the middle of a rule or macro definition. Roger> Being able to use 'ifndef' would also be another nice addition, Roger> or has this already been done (I possibly remember this being Roger> mentioned). You can use `if !FOO'. Tom
