Hello,
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 01:05:14PM +0200, Jari Strand wrote:
> I am sorry that I have to post again but I am still stuck with this
> problem. Was it so that the problem should have been fixed after changing
> the code to use the global target flags? I hope I have just done something
> wr
next.
Do you have any suggestion for solving this issue, can I post other files?
Thank you.
Jari.
From: Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jari Strand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: automake@gnu.org
Subject: Re: no rule to make asm targets
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:52:19 +0100
Hello,
On
Hello,
From: Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jari Strand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: automake@gnu.org
Subject: Re: no rule to make asm targets
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:52:19 +0100
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:21:09AM +0200, Jari Strand wrote:
> >For example, does b
Hello,
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:21:09AM +0200, Jari Strand wrote:
> >For example, does bin_PROGRAMS really contain only one program?
>
> Yes, [...]
OK, in that case there is no need to use per-target flags.
Let me show an example:
bin_PROGRAMS = first second third
first_SOURCES = first.c
sec
Hi,
From: Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jari Strand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: automake@gnu.org
Subject: Re: no rule to make asm targets
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 20:59:50 +0100
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 07:28:28PM +0200, Jari Strand wrote:
> Ralf wrote:
> >
Hello,
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 07:28:28PM +0200, Jari Strand wrote:
> Ralf wrote:
> >Generally, you could
> >- avoid per-target flags here to avoid the renamed object files, or
> >- write manual rules for all those objects, or
> >- write the target dependencies on the objects yourself, to control
From: Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jari Strand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: automake@gnu.org
Subject: Re: no rule to make asm targets
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 07:32:34 +0100
* Jari Strand wrote on Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 04:03:01AM CET:
> >From: Ralf Wildenhues
* Jari Strand wrote on Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 04:03:01AM CET:
> >From: Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >Please keep the mailing list in Cc:. Thanks.
>
> I am sorry because I don't know what Cc means?
It means that, when you reply, you should also send a copy of the
message to the automak
Hello,
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 02:19:35PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> In a plain Makefile, you'd do that with this line:
>
> .SUFFIXES: .asm .o
>
> In a Makefile.am, you instead write this:
>
> SUFFIXES = .asm .o
but it is not necessary in normal cases[*], Automake can deduce the
suffixes
Hello Jari,
Please keep the mailing list in Cc:. Thanks.
* Jari Strand wrote on Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 02:09:10PM CET:
> >From: Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >* Jari Strand wrote on Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 08:08:04PM CET:
> >>
> >> ..asm.o:
> >
> >This line should be (minus the indentation):
Hello Jari,
* Jari Strand wrote on Sun, Dec 03, 2006 at 08:08:04PM CET:
>
> dnl Check for nasm
> AC_PATH_PROG(NASM_PATH, nasm, no)
> AC_SUBST(NASM_PATH)
> if test x$NASM_PATH = xno; then
> AC_MSG_WARN(Couldn't find nasm)
> HAVE_NASM="no"
> else AC_DEFINE(HAVE_NASM, 1, [Define if NASM, the netwi
Hi, I'm trying to add build option for asm files and I have done this
succesfully before but there seems to be something wrong with my
configuration at this time.
This is what I have in configure.in:
dnl Check for nasm
AC_PATH_PROG(NASM_PATH, nasm, no)
AC_SUBST(NASM_PATH)
if test x$NASM_PATH
12 matches
Mail list logo
