On 12/04/2010 15:58, Peter Johansson wrote:
Jef Driesen wrote:
On 12/04/10 14:59, Peter Johansson wrote:
Also, I would try avoid distributing
`version.h', but not sure how to do that from top of my head.
Why would you not distribute it?
Well, it's a matter of taste, but I see no real reason to include it in
the tarball.
I think it's very useful that it gets distributed. Imagine someone
downloads a tarball and wants to built it with the msvc compiler
(which I support for my project). Since no files can be generated in
that (non autotools) environment, that works fine *if* the generated
files are distributed.
Yeah, but you don't need autotools to generate `version.h'. You only
need make, `version.h.in', and `version' of which the two latter are
already included in the distribution, right?
In case anyone is interested, I found how to avoid distribution of
generated header and source files. Just prefix them with nodist_
nodist_foobar_HEADERS = version.h
nodist_foobar_SOURCES = version.c
Of course that will break my msvc project files, as I mentioned in one
of my previous posts. But what if I could distribute these generated
files under a different name? For instance distribute the generated
"version.h" file as a "version.h.win32" file. That shouldn't cause any
problems in an autotools setup, and for my msvc project file, I can
provide a custom build rule to copy it back to a "version.h" file.
Is there a better way to do that compared to this:
version.h.win32: version.h
cp $< $@
EXTRA_DIST = version.h.win32
