I've used emake and always get this error irrespective of package.
Ofcourse, this happens only when something changes and automake
decides to recreate configure and then rerun it.
All I've been able to trace is that emake (probably) runs the configure script
on one of its agents and that creates t
Exactly. My solution is similar to what you suggest. I was just hoping that I'd
missed something. Since automake is 'just' perl it seems to be fairly hackable.
If I come up with anything worth sharing I'll pass it along.
--glenn
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralf Wildenhues [mailto:[EMAI
Hello,
* Upakul Barkakaty wrote on Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 01:41:15PM CEST:
>
> If I try to build iperf with standard linux make, then it builds fine.
> But instead if I use Electronic Make (emake) utility, then the build breaks.
>
> make[4]: conftest.make: No such file or directory
> make[4]:
* Schrader, Glenn wrote on Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:01:00PM CEST:
>
> This is exactly what doesn't work. All programs other than the check_
> programs are unconditionally built by the default 'all' target. There
> doesn't seem to be a clean way to defer building my tests until the
> user explicitly
Hello Akos,
* Akos Rajna wrote on Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 01:25:51PM CEST:
>
> can one configure automake to use gcc instead of solaris CC?
Yes. For automake-using packages:
./configure CC=gcc
For the Automake package itself: it doesn't use a compiler except in
some of the tests. For the latte
Hi all,
If I try to build iperf with standard linux make, then it builds fine.
But instead if I use Electronic Make (emake) utility, then the build breaks.
make[4]: conftest.make: No such file or directory
make[4]: *** No rule to make target `conftest.make'. Stop.
make[4]: confmf: No such
hi,
can one configure automake to use gcc instead of solaris CC?
thanks
> -Original Message-
> From: Ralf Wildenhues [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 3:50 PM
> To: Schrader, Glenn
> Cc: automake@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Question about testing a library.
>
> * Schrader, Glenn wrote on Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:10:13PM CEST:
> > I believe
* Schrader, Glenn wrote on Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 09:10:13PM CEST:
> I believe that I found the answer to my poorly asked question. My
> confusion started when I noticed that target lists that begin with
> check_ are special in that they are only built when 'make check' is
> executed. This is reasona
I believe that I found the answer to my poorly asked question. My confusion
started when I noticed that target lists that begin with check_ are special in
that they are only built when 'make check' is executed. This is reasonable
since you probably want to do a complete build before building any
Hello,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:42:10AM -0600, John Calcote wrote:
> Never mind ... duh ... I forgot to take the docs directory out of the
> EXTRA_DIST variable when I added it to the SUBDIRS variable.
>
> Thus (I'm guessing) the distdir code was trying to create files that
> were already in pl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Never mind ... duh ... I forgot to take the docs directory out of the
EXTRA_DIST variable when I added it to the SUBDIRS variable.
Thus (I'm guessing) the distdir code was trying to create files that
were already in place, and marked read-only by the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I have a simple makefile.am in my ftk/docs directory. All it's trying to
do is build and tar up doxygen docs:
ftk/docs/Makefile.am:
- ---
docpkg = $(PACKAGE)-doxy-$(VERSION)
pkgdata_DATA = $(docpkg).tar.gz
$(docpkg).tar.gz: doxygen.s
13 matches
Mail list logo
