> "Akim" == akim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> As far as I'm concerned, given that your mark are extremely easy
Akim> to remove, given that most messages are from the experimental
Akim> code, given that I certainly would like to toy with your
Akim> implementation, I'd vote for an inclusi
> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> From comp-vars.am:
Derek> DEFS = @DEFS@@DEFAULT_INCLUDES@
Derek> Automake subs some compiler include paths into
Derek> @DEFAULT_INCLUDES@ during the creation of Makefile.ins from
Derek> Makefile.ams so that any headers described i
> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> The case in question is the DEFAULT_INCLUDES variable being
Derek> substituted in as part of DEFS. Since Automake still asumes
Derek> that a call to AC_SUBST(DEFS) is always user-requested and that
Derek> a user request overrides
Pavel> Another related question before I go ahead and enforce a single
Pavel> standard.
Pavel> Should versobe messages go to stdout or stderr? Automake uses
Pavel> stdout, while all other auto* and aclocal use stderr.
It doesn't matter to me. Please feel free to implement what you think
is corr
Hello, Akim!
> If would be *wonderful* if someone had the courage to convert
> Automake's test suite to Autotest :(
It would be wonderful if Autotest supported XFAIL in same way. We have
tests that are known to be broken, and tests failing unexpectedly for
maintainers.
The way Autoconf is handl
"Derek R. Price" wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 01:17:13PM -0500, Derek R. Price wrote:
> > > Akim Demaille wrote:
> > > that I certainly would like to toy with your implementation, I'd vote
> > > for an inclusion in Automake. Do you have your papers? :)
>
> No,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 01:17:13PM -0500, Derek R. Price wrote:
> > Akim Demaille wrote:
> >
> > > "Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Patch against the current CVS Automake attached. Please excuse all the
> > "print STDERR"s and my initials littered i
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 01:17:13PM -0500, Derek R. Price wrote:
> Akim Demaille wrote:
>
> > "Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Patch against the current CVS Automake attached. Please excuse all the
> "print STDERR"s and my initials littered in comments around the things I was
> s
Akim Demaille wrote:
> "Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok, I have amtraces code that slurps in almost all the information that
> > scan_one_autoconf_file used to. Unfortuantely I hit a minor snag:
>
> We are probably working on the same things. Please, show some code so
> tha
"Derek R. Price" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, I have amtraces code that slurps in almost all the information that
> scan_one_autoconf_file used to. Unfortuantely I hit a minor snag:
We are probably working on the same things. Please, show some code so
that we don't duplicate.
> Since _al
Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In fact, when I run "autoreconf --verbose" I only want to know what it's
> running. I can hardly imagine that I'll ever really need the verbose
> output of all tools in the same time.
I do!
Then I'd suggest introducing --quiet too for silent, and have
Ok, I have amtraces code that slurps in almost all the information that
scan_one_autoconf_file used to. Unfortuantely I hit a minor snag:
Since _all_ AC_SUBSTs are being processed now, at least one instance
where Automake was allowing for user override is now broken.
The case in question is the
> But since it transmits the --verbnse to its slaves and its slaves are
> $verbosing on stderr, it should stay in stderr, so that messages
> remain in order. A preferable solution for autoreconf, IMHO, but
> somewhat more painful that the current status, would be to have
> autoreconf redirect the
Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello, Akim!
>
> Another related question before I go ahead and enforce a single standard.
>
> Should versobe messages go to stdout or stderr? Automake uses stdout,
> while all other auto* and aclocal use stderr.
I'm not consistent on this regard in th
Hello, Akim!
> Pavel> Hello! Aclocal didn't follow the GNU standard for the output
> Pavel> of non-interactive programs. Now all messages printed by
> Pavel> "aclocal --verbose" will start with "aclocal: " to make it
> Pavel> easier to find them in the autoreconf output.
>
> While you're at it,
Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm sorry if I did someting wrong. Everything that I removed didn't look
> like legitimate automake messages.
Indeed, they are not.
> I'm restoring the "traces:" lines.
Thanks!
Hello, Akim!
I'm sorry if I did someting wrong. Everything that I removed didn't look
like legitimate automake messages.
I was debugging another bug and I discovered that I don't understand the
messages produced by "autoreconf --force --verbose", i.e. it was hard to
figure out what program produ
| akim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > sub scan_autoconf_config_files
| > {
| > +print STDERR "=>> @_\n";
| > +print STDERR "==>> $_\n";
|
| Why do you expect $_ to contain anything in particular at this point?
| You've not assigned anything to it in this sub. $_ is a completely
| sep
> "Pavel" == Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pavel> Hello! Aclocal didn't follow the GNU standard for the output
Pavel> of non-interactive programs. Now all messages printed by
Pavel> "aclocal --verbose" will start with "aclocal: " to make it
Pavel> easier to find them in the autore
| Hello, Akim!
| > +print STDERR "=>> @_\n";
| > +print STDERR "==>> $_\n";
|
| I disagree with this style of programming.
Are you serious? You really can't differentiate from an actual patch
submitted for inclusion, and something I post wishing someone could
explain to me what I misse
> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> Can there be any non source files which we want to ship?
Tom> Yes, sometimes. For instance with ansi2knr support we ship the
Tom> man page. I don't know whether this impacts au
21 matches
Mail list logo
