Re: Java Support In Future Releases?

Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: 08 Nov 2002 09:40:21 + > > > > Would the auto* tool maintainers be interested in hearing more about > > automakejar's functionality? Perhaps with a view to implementing > > similar functionality in automake? > > May

Re: Java Support In Future Releases?

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: 08 Nov 2002 09:40:21 + > > Would the auto* tool maintainers be interested in hearing more about > automakejar's functionality? Perhaps with a view to implementing > similar functionality in automake? Maybe. Do you have a URL or brief summary explaining the a

Re: ccache and autotools

Is it possible to tell autoconf/automake to not use -MT when generating the Makefiles? Would it not be best to fix ccache? Or is it such that ccache should avoid -MT? In fact, ccache tells in logfile that -MT is not supported. What does -MT do? And why dows autoconf use it? Can we not use

Re: ccache and autotools

Jean-Eric Cuendet wrote: Hi, I have a C++ project with a lot of source files (~4000). I'd like to use ccache to speed recompilation of the project. I can't since ccache doesn't support -MT flag to gcc What does EXACTLY this flags? Is it possible to tell autoconf/automake to not use -MT when genera

ccache and autotools

Hi, I have a C++ project with a lot of source files (~4000). I'd like to use ccache to speed recompilation of the project. I can't since ccache doesn't support -MT flag to gcc What does EXACTLY this flags? Is it possible to tell autoconf/automake to not use -MT when generating the Makefiles? Thank

Re: cxx + cpp

Thanks. Upgrading to 1.7.1 solved my problem -jec Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: "Jean-Eric" == Jean-Eric Cuendet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Jean-Eric> Thus the question how to tell automake not to doubly define that. I think upgrading the Automake 1.7.1 should be enough. The l

Re: Java Support In Future Releases?

Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Paul Eggert wrote: > >>From: "Eric Lemings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 14:23:28 -0700 > >> > >>After reading through Section 11.4 of the Automake Manual, I was just = > >>curious about how well future releases of Automake (and Autoconf) ar