Am Samstag, den 06.05.2006, 17:09 +0200 schrieb Daniel Leidert: > Am Samstag, den 06.05.2006, 16:52 +0200 schrieb Ralf Wildenhues: > > * Daniel Leidert wrote on Sat, May 06, 2006 at 03:26:06PM CEST: > > > Package: automake1.9 > > > Version: 1.9.6-4 > > > > > I may be wrong, but only using man_MANS has no effect on the resulting > > > Makefile. The related targets are not created. When I instead use > > > > > > manx_MANS (x=0-9) > > > > > > the resulting Makefile.in contains all targets to read and install > > > manpage (e.g. install-manx, uninstall-manx, MANS, ...) determined by > > > manx_MANS and(!) man_MANS. So for me it seems, there must be a bug. > > > > Could you supply a small example that exposes the bug you see, and > > stating what behavior you expect? > > As a small example for what I tried: > > man_src = \ > foo.1.xml \ > bar.1.xml \ > lib.3.cml > > man_MANS = $(patsubst %.xml,%,$(man_src)) > > [..] > > And I thought, that man_MANS therefor is foo.1 bar.1 lib.3. But nothing > happens and the Makefile does not show MANS nor install/uninstall > targets. But adding a target > > all-local: $(man_MANS) > > shows, that man_MANS has the right content.
I forgot something, why I thought, this is a bug. A similar code, works: man1_MANS = $(patsubst %.1.xml,%.1,$(filter %.1.xml,$(man_src))) man3_MANS = $(patsubst %.3.xml,%.3,$(filter %.3.xml,$(man_src))) This works perfectly. So I thought, man_MANS should work too. Regards, Daniel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
