> I for one would be glad if automake required GNU make, since it
> could make use of a lot of useful features which currently aren't
> allowed. Similar to autoconf not requiring a POSIX shell, depite
> the fact that non-POSIX shells are so far obsolete they are
> irrelevant.
Are there any tools
On 8/1/2010 2:11 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> So let me rephrase the question: if we have the ability to build
> completely with MSVC within a shell environment such as MinGW/MSYS
> would people still need something like nmake support?
Speaking for myself and my projects -- no, I would not.
On 3/22/10 6:50 PM, John Calcote wrote:
> Reuben, you've just hit upon one of the two most significant problems
> with Javadoc and the like (including doxygen, man pages, and info pages):
Agreed -- which is why I think it would be wonderful if there was strong
Autotools support for literate progra
I've used Autotools in a few small projects before, but nothing which
required auxiliary files to support the binaries. Typically, I've seen
these auxiliary files stored in /usr/share/package-version/, and would
like to do the same thing for my own package via Autotools.
I'm able to get /usr/shar
John Calcote wrote:
> Hmmm. I'd have to disagree here. I carefully consider every warning I
> see, and evaluate whether or not it represents a real problem.
Yes. This strikes me as perfectly sane behavior.
Insisting on warning-free builds is not sane behavior, especially given
just how many comp
Bob Proulx wrote:
To give you a different perspective, I *hate* that format because it
hides problems and *makes debugging harder*. I want to see exactly
the command that was executed. I want to see the entire command. I
don't want to see an abbreviation of the command.
Fortunately, no one i
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> It probably is a bug. I for one use bison/yacc very sparingly only and
> lack the experience how to deal with it portably. Which is why it would
> be better if someone else worked on fixing it.
For whatever it's worth, I have always found bison's C++ support to be
sub-p
jasond wrote:
Recently, I converted the project over to using Autotools and am
wondering if there is a portable way to instruct automake to generate
Makefiles that build code while treating all encountered warnings as
errors?
Probably so, and I'm sure Ralf will know what it is. However, this i
Could you give me an hand, i have been searching for 2 entire days..
Try Fink.
http://fink.sourceforge.net
For a project I'm working on, I need a crossplatform XML inspector.
GDOME2 is out because it doesn't work on OS X, so we're instead
looking at Sablotron. Looking at the Autoconf Archive I don't see
any m4 macros for Sablotron, nor does it come with a pkg-config file.
What is the canonical
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Never mind what I wrote. Please.
After the sea of good bits that have flowed from your PC in the last few
months, Ralf, I think we're all just going to attribute whatever was
wrong to TCP transmission error. It was time for a bad packet anyway.
Resend?
Thanks very much,
I'm currently taking a course in graphics programming with OpenGL, and
thought it would be kind of me to turn in assignments which are
./configurable. My desktop environment is an OS X box, and the TAs are
running a variety of different Unices.
This seems like a job for Autotools, so I set up a m
12 matches
Mail list logo
