So what do you think? Is my characterization reasonable/unreasonable,
am I missing something, ... or ...?
Any other opinions?
-miles
--
`Suppose Korea goes to the World Cup final against Japan and wins,' Moon said.
`All the past could be forgiven.' [NYT]
Stefano Lattarini writes:
> It seems to me that the situation there has improved a lot in the
> recent years, to the point that recursive and non-recursive build
> support is almost on-par (and the non-recursive option is the
> recommended one). Or are you referring to documentation issues rather
Hi Miles.
On 08/29/2013 06:02 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Diego Elio Pettenò writes:
I would also argue for just using non-recursive automake, but it might be
the least of your problems for now.
"Just" is probably not the right term, as it generally seems to
require more work to make a good non-r
On 08/26/2013 03:30 PM, Shawn Webb wrote:
Hey All,
Hi Shawn, sorry for the delay.
I'm working on ClamAV and am restructuring our autoconf/automake
scripts to be a bit more organized and modernized. On one machine, I
have automake 1.14 installed.. On another, much older machine, I have
automak
Diego Elio Pettenò writes:
> I would also argue for just using non-recursive automake, but it might be
> the least of your problems for now.
"Just" is probably not the right term, as it generally seems to
require more work to make a good non-recursive build setup with
automake, even if it's funct
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Shawn Webb wrote:
> clamd_SOURCES = \
This is just a guess because I can't look at your repositories right now,
but I would suggest bringing the declaration of clamd_SOURCES *outside* the
conditional, that might fix the make distclean.
I would also argue for ju
Hey All,
I'm working on ClamAV and am restructuring our autoconf/automake
scripts to be a bit more organized and modernized. On one machine, I
have automake 1.14 installed.. On another, much older machine, I have
automake 1.11.1 installed.
Quick history of why I'm emailing: ClamAV's codebase has
