On 13 Jan 2001, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2001, Michael Still <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Why don;t you just have some different primaries?
>
> The issue is not about having different programs depending on the
> packaging tool. It's about creating multiple binary packages, with
>
> "Ganesan" == Ganesan Rajagopal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ganesan> I have been thinking about this too. Installable objects
Ganesan> should have a package prefix. We can also have a global
Ganesan> variable called PACKAGES or something like that, so that
Ganesan> automake can generate inst
> "Michael" == Michael Still <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> lib_LIBRARIES = libfoo.a
>> devel_header_HEADERS = foo/foo.h
Michael> Why don;t you just have some different primaries? Like, for
Michael> instance:
Michael> rpm_PROGRAMS = foo
Michael> foo_SOURCES = foo.c wibble.c hamster.c
This
> "Kevin" == Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kevin> I thought to use this as a convenience library built only under a
Kevin> "make check". If this is how it's meant to be used then I think it
Kevin> should omit -rpath, the same as noinst_LTLIBRARIES.
Kevin> * automake.in (han
