On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 03:04:30PM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote: > Sorry, missed your message in the thread:
No problem, thanks for replying. > > > build-%: > > > PYTHON=`which python$*` ./configure > > I guess this should have been "`which $*` ./configure", right? If so, > > read on. > > Nope, this is correct, "pyversions -vr debian/control" gives you "2.4 > 2.5", not "python2.4 python2.5". (In practice, I don't think there are Yeah, but personally I wouldn't call Makefile targets as such, I would rather prefer to $(foreach ...) on the output of "pyversions -vr ..." (which IIRC was not in your posted example FWIW) in order to replace the bare version names with some more meaningful target names as "build-python2.4" or something such. > I wouldn't lose anything; I don't think I would gain anything either; > the point was that it isn't a good idea to call make as a method to > check whether I implemented the build-arch concept. In fact, I already Well, if the example is the one you gave, I still think that it is the example itself which should be improved rather than took as a proof of concept that build-arch can't be detected that way. How many examples are around there like yours? I think they should be fixed nevertheless, and I don't even think there are many ... Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what? [EMAIL PROTECTED],debian.org,bononia.it} -%- http://www.bononia.it/zack/ (15:56:48) Zack: e la demo dema ? /\ All one has to do is hit the (15:57:15) Bac: no, la demo scema \/ right keys at the right time
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
