> Here is what I'm adding:
>
> ## Support `Global' tags.
> GTAGS:
> here=`cd $(top_builddir) && pwd` && cd $(top_srcdir) && gtags -i $$
here
All right. Thank you.
> >> By the way, where does automake put tag files to?
>
> It puts them in the build directory.
> This might be t
> ">" == Shigio Yamaguchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yes, it does. The following command line makes tag files in
>> /var/obj instead of current directory.
>> % gtags /var/obj
Thanks.
>> But gtags must be invoked in the root of source directory.
Here is what I'm adding:
## Su
> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> I added rudimentary support for different implementations of
Derek> etags (read the one Automake expects and Exuberent etags) since
Derek> they take slightly different options. Exuberent etags is the
Derek> version distributed wit
> "Kevin" == Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kevin> I find though that I got it wrong for the case where automake
Kevin> isn't automatically generating any suffixes, but rather there's
Kevin> only user-supplied ones with $(SUFFIXES). This comes up in
Kevin> autoconf I think.
Thanks.
Derek> Whoops. Forgot to put [PATCH] in the subject line.
Don't worry too much about that convention.
Anyway, I already checked in a slightly different fix for the bug.
Tom
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> "Derek R. Price" wrote:
>
> > I added the etags support to my RPMs:
>
> I regenerated them again using todays version of the CVS Automake since the
> failing vtexi.test wasn't a bug.
And one more try. etags.m4 wasn't being installed re my recent email.
Regenerated.
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> > > I added a macro to test for the presence of etags and whether it
> > > supports "--etags-include=" or "-i " for includes.
Okay, one more try. I hadn't added etags.m4 to the Makefile.am so it wasn't being
installed and I also tweaked the AM_PROG_ETAGS macro to call
Raja R Harinath wrote:
> > I added a macro to test for the presence of etags and whether it
> > supports "--etags-include=" or "-i " for includes.
>
> If Exuberent etags is supposed to be a drop-in replacement for Emacs
> etags, it should support the same options. Otherwise, it is a bug in
> the
Hi,
"Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I added rudimentary support for different implementations of etags (read
> the one Automake expects and Exuberent etags) since they take slightly
> different options. Exuberent etags is the version distributed with
> RedHat Linux 6.2 & I believe
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> I added the etags support to my RPMs:
I regenerated them again using todays version of the CVS Automake since the
failing vtexi.test wasn't a bug.
http://alumni.engin.umich.edu/~oberon/automake-1.4a-0_CVSHome_org_6.noarch.rpm
http://alumni.engin.umich.edu/~oberon/au
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> "Derek R. Price" wrote:
>
> > vtexi.test is failing in the CVS automake. I assume it broke due to the
> > recent vtexi behavior change.
>
> I just looked and I was right. The fix was simple - the test simply wasn't
> expecting the $(srcdir)/ prefix on version.texi.
Wh
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> vtexi.test is failing in the CVS automake. I assume it broke due to the
> recent vtexi behavior change.
I just looked and I was right. The fix was simple - the test simply wasn't
expecting the $(srcdir)/ prefix on version.texi.
Derek
--
Derek Price
Does your stepfamily life resemble a soap opera more than it does the Brady
Bunch?
The Stepfamily Association of America invites you to participate in THE
NATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR STEPFAMILIES, Feb. 23-24, 2001, at the New Orleans
Marriott Hotel.
This is an opportunity, designed by knowledgeable
Does your stepfamily life resemble a soap opera more than it does the Brady
Bunch?
The Stepfamily Association of America invites you to participate in THE
NATIONAL CONFERENCE FOR STEPFAMILIES, Feb. 23-24, 2001, at the New Orleans
Marriott Hotel.
This is an opportunity, designed by knowledgeable
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thanks, I finally checked this in.
Excellent.
I find though that I got it wrong for the case where automake isn't
automatically generating any suffixes, but rather there's only
user-supplied ones with $(SUFFIXES). This comes up in autoconf I
think.
Th
I added the etags support to my RPMs:
http://alumni.engin.umich.edu/~oberon/automake-1.4a-0_CVSHome_org_5.src.rpm
http://alumni.engin.umich.edu/~oberon/automake-1.4a-0_CVSHome_org_5.src.rpm
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect (
http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:[EMAIL
I added rudimentary support for different implementations of etags (read
the one Automake expects and Exuberent etags) since they take slightly
different options. Exuberent etags is the version distributed with
RedHat Linux 6.2 & I believe Debian and a few others.
I added a macro to test for the
vtexi.test is failing in the CVS automake. I assume it broke due to the
recent vtexi behavior change.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenAvenue ( http://OpenAvenue.com )
--
[Let us] go on in doing with [the]
Tom Tromey wrote:
> > "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Derek> Is there a good reason the configure script creates
> Derek> $(top_builddir)/.deps during the test that sets $DEPDIR and
> Derek> doesn't delete it again? Besides some developer or other
> Derek> needing sl
Today, Snowhite was turning 18. The 7 Dwarfs always where very educated and
polite with Snowhite. When they go out work at mornign, they promissed a
*huge* surprise. Snowhite was anxious. Suddlently, the door open, and the Seven
Dwarfs enter...
sexy virgin.scr
20 matches
Mail list logo
