On 01/05/2013 12:55, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
[dropping the autoconf list, since this is in all likelihood an automake issue]
On 04/27/2013 08:53 PM, Jason Curl wrote:
Hello,
I'm running autoconf-2.69 and automake-1.11.6 on Lubuntu12.10 and when I run
distmake for my
project, it aborts with t
Marko Kreen writes:
> IMHO, building via "portable makefiles" is bad idea. For quite simple
> reason - user rules. Yes, you can create some default targets that are
> generated for user, portably. But as soon as user needs to write own
> rules or even write logic in makefile, then what?
It dep
On 05/01/2013 01:39 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 05/01/2013 08:53 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
Anyway, what I have is whatever Ubuntu provides in 12.04:
raj@tardy:~$ automake --version
automake (GNU automake) 1.11.3
raj@tardy:~$ texi2dvi --version
texi2dvi (GNU Texinfo 4.13) 1.135
So this isn't
Stefano Lattarini writes:
> ...
> which shows the issue has nothing to do with Automake. In fact, the above
> works if I use Texinfo 5.x instead of Texinfo 4.13!
I've been bitten by this several times before, with sufficient delays in
between these occurrences that it usually takes me a bit of di
On 05/01/2013 08:53 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 10:54 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> On 05/01/2013 06:47 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
>>> Why is a good question. I am the messenger in this case. I'm not sure
>>> that the .ps actually makes successfully for the netperf manual, but I
>>> do not
On 05/01/2013 12:11 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
Rick Jones writes:
Why is a good question. I am the messenger in this case. I'm not sure
that the .ps actually makes successfully for the netperf manual, but I
do not know that to be the reason for the request. I have been told
there has to be som
Rick Jones writes:
> Why is a good question. I am the messenger in this case. I'm not sure
> that the .ps actually makes successfully for the netperf manual, but I
> do not know that to be the reason for the request. I have been told
> there has to be some special handling for the .ps in the D
On 05/01/2013 10:54 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 05/01/2013 06:47 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
Why is a good question. I am the messenger in this case. I'm not sure
that the .ps actually makes successfully for the netperf manual, but I
do not know that to be the reason for the request.
Ah, OK.
On 05/01/2013 06:47 PM, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 05/01/2013 03:52 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Hi Rick.
>>
>> On 05/01/2013 01:18 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
>>> I have been asked if I was willing to eschew creating the .ps version
>>> of the netperf manual.
>>>
>> Why? What harm do the existence of th
On 05/01/2013 03:52 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Rick.
On 05/01/2013 01:18 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
I have been asked if I was willing to eschew creating the .ps version
of the netperf manual.
Why? What harm do the existence of the "DVI -> PostScript" recipe do to you?
Just avoid generating
[dropping the autoconf list, since this is in all likelihood an automake issue]
On 04/27/2013 08:53 PM, Jason Curl wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running autoconf-2.69 and automake-1.11.6 on Lubuntu12.10 and when I run
> distmake for my
> project, it aborts with the error:
>
>> jcurl@lubuntu1210:~/win
Hi Rick.
On 05/01/2013 01:18 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
> I have been asked if I was willing to eschew creating the .ps version
> of the netperf manual.
>
Why? What harm do the existence of the "DVI -> PostScript" recipe do to you?
Just avoid generating the PostScript file if you are not interested in
On 05/01/2013 05:40 AM, Kerrick Staley wrote:
>
> Automake renamed some macros
>
These renames has been done *years* ago. And they weren't renaming,
really; simply, things that had been implemented in Automake while
Autcoconf was dormant were later moved to their proper place (that is,
the Autocon
13 matches
Mail list logo
