On 21 September 2010 14:55, Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> wrote: > Reuben Thomas <r...@sc3d.org> writes: > >> On 21 September 2010 13:38, Simon Josefsson <si...@josefsson.org> wrote: >>> Reuben Thomas <r...@sc3d.org> writes: >>> >>>> 1. The example Makefile.am code has "lib/" rather than "src/" in the >>>> path to the source code, even though it's clearly the package source >>>> that is to be analysed, not the gnulib library code. >>> >>> This is because it is an example, and the projects I used it for had the >>> "real" code in lib/ (and the gnulib code in gl/ or similar). Maybe the >>> example could be changed to use src/ as that may be more common, but >>> still, it is an example snippet that needs to be adapted by the >>> maintainer anyway... >> >> Indeed. Maybe src/ is rather commoner as a source directory? >> >> Attached, two patches, one to s/lib/src/ and one to fix a typo that an >> earlier patch somehow introduced (s/PACKAG/PACKAGE/). Sorry about the >> latter. > > Thanks, applied. In the future, please also write a ChangeLog entry.
Yes, sorry, not writing ChangeLog entries for patches is a very bad habit of mine which I always tell myself off for and it's about time I actually did something about it. -- http://rrt.sc3d.org
