Re: What is meant by, "XXX does not appear in AM_CONDITIONAL"?

2005-01-10 Thread Ralf Corsepius
On Mon, 2005-01-10 at 08:35 -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > Hi Stepan, > > On Monday 10 January 2005 06:00 am, Stepan Kasal wrote: > > > So it's usually enough to write > > > Well, I'd use > > > > if [some-shell-script-test] > > then > > ... > > AM_CONDITIONAL([XXX], [true]) > > else > >

Re: Conditional append

2005-01-10 Thread J.T. Conklin
Shaun Jackman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks Stepan. I'm going to go with your latter suggestion, since it > doesn't require modifying all the other Makefile.am. This seems like a > rather arbitrary limitation of automake though. Is there any reason > why the append operator shouldn't treat a

Re: What is meant by, "XXX does not appear in AM_CONDITIONAL"?

2005-01-10 Thread Bruce Korb
Hi Stepan, On Monday 10 January 2005 06:00 am, Stepan Kasal wrote: > So it's usually enough to write > Well, I'd use > > if [some-shell-script-test] > then > ... > AM_CONDITIONAL([XXX], [true]) > else > ... > AM_CONDITIONAL([XXX], [false]) > fi This is more-or-less exactly what is

Re: Conditional append

2005-01-10 Thread Stepan Kasal
Hi. On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 12:20:57PM -0800, Shaun Jackman wrote: > Is there any reason why the append operator shouldn't treat an > undefined variable as empty? Safety, I guess. make handles variables differently from normal imperative languages, so you can do this in your makefile: a=$b c b=

Re: What is meant by, "XXX does not appear in AM_CONDITIONAL"?

2005-01-10 Thread Stepan Kasal
Hi On Sat, Jan 08, 2005 at 03:21:44PM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > [`some-shell-script-test` > if test $? -eq 0 > then] > AM_CONDITIONAL([XXX], [true]) > [else] > AM_CONDITIONAL([XXX],[false]) > [fi] one usually relies that `else', `fi', etc. are not m4 macros. So it's usually enough to write [so