On Thu, 20 May 2004, Albert Chin wrote:
> On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 11:24:49AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 May 2004, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > > I was expecting this sort of answer, but was hoping that then I would
> > > also get a pointer to how else to possibly achieve the same t
On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 11:24:49AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2004, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> > I was expecting this sort of answer, but was hoping that then I would
> > also get a pointer to how else to possibly achieve the same thing.
>
> For the package I support, I added a co
On Mon, 17 May 2004, Jan Beulich wrote:
> I was expecting this sort of answer, but was hoping that then I would
> also get a pointer to how else to possibly achieve the same thing.
For the package I support, I added a configure option to enable
verbose libtool output. Libtool is executed in sile
I was expecting this sort of answer, but was hoping that then I would
also get a pointer to how else to possibly achieve the same thing.
Thanks, Jan
>>> Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 17.05.04 16:41:15
>>>
On Mon, 17 May 2004, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Wouldn't it make sense to have automake gene
On Mon, 17 May 2004, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Wouldn't it make sense to have automake generate the LIBTOOL variable by
> default so that libtool's verbosity matches that of make, i.e. by
> something like
>
> LIBTOOL = @LIBTOOL@ $(if $(findstring s,$(filter-out
> --%,$(MAKEFLAGS))),--silent)
This look
Wouldn't it make sense to have automake generate the LIBTOOL variable by
default so that libtool's verbosity matches that of make, i.e. by
something like
LIBTOOL = @LIBTOOL@ $(if $(findstring s,$(filter-out
--%,$(MAKEFLAGS))),--silent)
rather than the plain
LIBTOOL = @LIBTOOL@
Thanks, Jan
