Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Akim> This patch includes all the diffs of Makefile.ins, i.e., subdirs'
> Akim> Makefile have not changed. The big change in the top Makefile.in
> Akim> comes from the fact that the so called
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Akim> It is on purpose my uses of uniq have no &: it disables
> Akim> prototype checking.
>
> Do we really want prototypes? I seem to remember Perl experts telling
> me that they are confusin
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW it is hard to read big rearrangement patches.
Agreed.
> It is made worse because sometimes they include actual code changes
> as well. For instance this patch wasn't just a rearrangement, it
> included semantic differences in file_contents.
That'
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Beware: I believe there is one place in automake where local() is
> required. I know that sucks. I think it is in the variable expansion
> code, but I'm afraid I don't remember for certain.
Yes, I seem to recall I found one. I forgot my patches today :
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Akim> Ideally I'd say we need objects for variables, and have a
> Akim> uniformized handling of conditionalized/unconditinal variables.
>
> This patch needed a lot less defense than you posted -- the only
> reason conditionals were implemented in that ugl
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Akim> * dist-vars.am: Remove, merge into...
> Akim> * distdir.am: this.
> Akim> * automake.in (dirname, basename, backname): Move at the top of
> Akim> the file
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Akim> As a specific advice, please, never test again any of the
> Akim> Autotools as root, as they are not meant for it, and this
> Akim> produces false alarms.
>
> Maybe we could modify `defs
I don't understand the following line in automake.in. It seems very
wrong to me, but...
# Read Makefile.am and set up %contents. Simultaneously copy lines
# from Makefile.am into $output_trailer or $output_vars as
# appropriate. NOTE we put rules in the trailer section. We want
# user rules
I don't understand this:
~/src/am % make -s check TESTS=distdir.test nostromo Err 2
Making check in .
Making check in m4
Making check in tests
PASS: distdir.test
==
All 1 tests passed
==
~/src/am % grep -C10 'mkinstall.*foo' tests/testSubDir/M
"Tim Van Holder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK - here goes. I've listed '[\\/]* | ?:[\\/]*' as the canonical
> absolute path test; I'll submit patches to use this throughout autoconf
> later.
Plenty of thanks!
> +@itemize @bullet
@bullets are atrocious! We use @minus.
> +@item No multipl
Running automake (CVS compiled) against my configure.in causes the
message "automake: configure.in: required file `master/depcomp' not found.
There is no mention to a file called "depcomp" in configure.in or
master/Makefile.am. In the master/Makefile.in there is mention to it:
depcomp = $(SHELL)
> "Pavel" == Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pavel> ChangeLog:
Pavel> * header-vars.am: Remove tabs before variable definitions.
Thanks.
Tom
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> I don't understand this:
Akim> $(mkinstalldirs) $(distdir)/foo foo <<<
Akim> What is this second foo doing here?
Bug.
Tom
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> But we have to be sure that this change doesn't cause problems in
>> this scenario.
Akim> I fail to see where such a thing can happen.
Ok.
Akim> Maybe you are think to some Cygnus tree or something?
The Cygnus tree doesn't use `make
Hi,
Stephen Torri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Running automake (CVS compiled) against my configure.in causes the
> message "automake: configure.in: required file `master/depcomp' not found.
> There is no mention to a file called "depcomp" in configure.in or
> master/Makefile.am. In the master/M
> "Paul" == Paul Martinolich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Paul>1260 &require_config_file ($FOREIGN, 'compile')
Paul>1261 if $lang eq 'c';
Paul> This makes the error about not finding './compile' go away.
Paul> I now have it in config subdirectory.
Hello!
When you modify Automake and commit your changes it's often a good idea to
run the new automake in the automake working directory and check the
difference in Makefile.in.
This trick would show you that the variables "host_alias" and others are
now preceeded by tabs. This is not good.
Cha
What is the general policy wrt `optimizations' in automake vs leaving
some job to make? For instance there are many places with code like:
if ($relative_dir eq '.')
{
push (@files, 'acconfig.h');
}
else
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* automake.in: Promote local `my' over `local'.
Index: automake.in
--- automake.in Wed, 21 Feb 2001 00:28:50 +0100 akim (am/f/39_automake.i 1.58 755)
+++ automake.in Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:51:21 +0100 akim (am/f/39_au
[Arg - damn outlook keeps sending mail before I want it to ]
> Plenty of thanks!
I'd like to say it was a pleasure, but writing docs never is :-)
> @bullets are atrocious! We use @minus.
Fine by me. Note that the only two other @itemizes in the manual
both use @bullet.
> I removed the @*, AFAI
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Akim Demaille
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 10:43
To: Tim Van Holder
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Manual additions (DOS issues)
"Tim Van Holder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* automake.in: Formatting and mying changes.
Index: automake.in
--- automake.in Tue, 20 Feb 2001 19:41:10 +0100 akim (am/f/39_automake.i 1.56 755)
+++ automake.in Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:26:36 +0100 akim (am/f/39_autom
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* automake.in: Formatting and mying changes.
Index: automake.in
--- automake.in Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:28:16 +0100 akim (am/f/39_automake.i 1.57 755)
+++ automake.in Tue, 20 Feb 2001 20:44:05 +0100 akim (am/f/39_autom
In two chunks 'coz I first went too far :)
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* automake.in: Formatting changes.
Index: automake.in
--- automake.in Mon, 19 Feb 2001 02:58:32 +0100 akim (am/f/39_automake.i 1.53 755)
+++ automake.in Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:54:15 +0100 a
FYI, here is the result on CVS Autoconf:
/tmp/ace % for i in **/Makefile.in 19:29 remo
diff -u $i.bak $i
--- man/Makefile.in.bak Tue Feb 20 19:15:30 2001
+++ man/Makefile.in Tue Feb 20 19:28:59 2001
@@ -109,6 +109,7 @@
install-man1:
+ @$(NORMAL_INSTA
Akim Demaille wrote:
> What is the general policy wrt `optimizations' in automake vs leaving
> some job to make? For instance there are many places with code like:
>
> if ($relative_dir eq '.')
> {
> push (@files, 'acconfig.h');
>
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Akim> -install-man: $(MANS)
> Akim> - @$(NORMAL_INSTALL)
> Akim> - $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) install-man1
>
> I'm concerned about this.
>
> Before this change, `install-man' would e
Hello, Akim!
You recently applied a patch to tests/target-cflags.test without
mentioning it in ChangeLog. Maybe you didn't mean to commit that change?
If you did, then two small fixes are needed:
1) You should run ./foo instead /foo
2) bash could not detect it because "set -e" doesn't propagate
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> This patch applies the same transformation, factoring, to
Akim> install-data, install-exec and uninstall.
Akim> Below are first presented the Makefiles of Automake. There is
Akim> obviously a problem, which I do not solve in this a
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> This patch applies the same transformation, factoring, to
Akim> install-data, install-exec and uninstall.
I haven't read this patch yet but I wanted to respond to some comments
before I did.
Akim> Below are first presented the Make
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> $(mkinstalldirs) $(distdir)/foo foo <<<
Akim> What is this second foo doing here?
I checked in a test for this.
Tom
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am not aware of the problems. I know they forbid things, but then
> using & again fixes the issue (i.e., I'm not aware of problems which
> require removing the prototype, adjusting the call is enough).
The major issue is this one, from perlsub:
> "Pavel" == Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pavel> Also it would be nice if you checked on some projects that the
Pavel> makefiles don't change. I see you are doing it with
Pavel> Autoconf. Consider a bigger project for the test (Lesstif
Pavel> should be fine).
Sometimes I test aga
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> -install-man: $(MANS)
Akim> - @$(NORMAL_INSTALL)
Akim> - $(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) install-man1
I'm concerned about this.
Before this change, `install-man' would ensure that the man pages were
rebuilt. After this change,
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> I don't understand the following line in automake.in. It seems
Akim> very wrong to me, but...
Akim> => $contents{$1} = 1;
This is very, very old code. Sometimes it is fun to use `cvs
annotate' to see how old:
1.105
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> What is the general policy wrt `optimizations' in automake vs
Akim> leaving some job to make?
Let make do it.
Seriously, I've never done any performance measurements to see how or
if we could speed up generated Makefiles. If we di
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> * automake.in: Formatting changes.
Please say something like "Use my instead of local", since this goes
beyond mere formatting.
Akim> -local ($sect, %sections, %vlist);
Akim> +local (%sections, %vlist);
I think the new s
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> * automake.in: Formatting and mying changes.
Ok.
Akim> + # FIXME: This code is mad, rewrite!
At the time it was hard to find a better solution.
Maybe we can do better now. Or maybe not.
Or are you just referri
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> * automake.in (&am_install_var): Don't hook on the clean targets
Akim> and .PHONY.
Akim> * data-clean.am, java-clean.am, libs-clean.am, lisp-clean.am,
Akim> * ltlib-clean.am, progs-clean.am, python-clean.am, tags-clean.am:
A
Akim> * automake.in: Promote local `my' over `local'.
Ok.
Thanks for doing this. I'm sure it is a pain.
Tom
> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Akim> * automake.in: Formatting and mying changes.
Ok.
Could you add a `maintainer-check' rule to ensure that `local' doesn't
creep back into the source? That would be handy...
Tom
Hello, Akim!
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Index: ChangeLog
> from Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * automake.in: Promote local `my' over `local'.
I fully agree with this approch. I believe you should be allowed to
checking such patched without approval. But please b
> "Pavel" == Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Pavel> It should be [EMAIL PROTECTED] for consistency with
Pavel> Autoconf.
... and every other project in existence.
This change is fine with me. Someone else has to create the list
though.
Can it be archived at GNU? If not, tell me
Hello, Allan!
On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Allan Clark wrote:
> Akim, everyone;
I'm rather everyone than Akim, but anyway :-)
> Is there I way I can simply get the discussion, without the binary/patch
> traffic? I would prefer to receive this kind of thing through an update
> from a source-control (i
Is this only GNU Make, or a general property?
/tmp % cat Makefile 21:37 remo
all: foo bar
.PHONY: all foo
/tmp % make 21:37 remo
make: *** No rule to make target `bar', needed by `all'. Stop
45 matches
Mail list logo
