"edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> cond3.test fails for three reasons.
Thanks, the fix has been applied.
> 3) cond3.test has an incorrect comparison test function (the sed script
> skips a line!) sorry, i'm not a big fan of sed. oh well.
I had reworked the snippet in the meanwhile. It
"edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> prior to this patch, automake would not generate rules for
> foo_SOURCES -> foo_OBJECTS etc. now it does, and the conditionals determine
> which get executed
I have plenty of patches in the queue that address things related to
this issue :(
> 1) a
"Lars J. Aas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 11:48:05AM +0100, Akim Demaille wrote:
> : This is the bug reported by Lars.
>
> Thanks, it did the trick...
I'm applying it, it's an obvious bug fix and I just noticed there are
other messages related to this.
ChangeLog:
2001-03-12 Edward M. Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* progs.am: install patch for Cygwin. The cygwin /usr/bin/install
program has the following behavior for install -c SRC DST:
Scenario 1: "src.exe" exists and "src" does not:
1) if SRC=src.exe and DST=dst.e
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > cond3.test fails
| --- orig/automake.in.orig Mon Mar 12 06:44:59 2001
| +++ automake.in Mon Mar 12 07:44:57 2001
| @@ -1048,8 +1048,17 @@
| # If OBJEXT/EXEEXT were not set in configure.in, do it, it
| # simplifies our task, and anyway starting with Autoconf 2.50, it
| # will always be defined, and
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
> Huh? It is still wrong. This has no reason to depend upon the
> machine on
> "tailbert" == tailbert writes:
>> Rather the proper fix seems to have the failing tests include
>> AC_EXEEXT and AC_OBJEXT in their configure.in.
tailbert> Akim, I mean in the general case, even outside of the test
tailbert> cases. On windows platforms, executables get a .exe
tailbert> e
> "Geoff" == Geoff Quelch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Geoff> I am attempting to build a project with C and F90 sources. I
Geoff> have found a way around autoconf and automake attemting to use
Geoff> f77 to compile the Fortran sources, by placing "F77=f90" in
Geoff> Makefile.am. However, I hav
- Original Message -
From: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 11:51 PM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
Hi,
I've altered pr19.test to be (added VERBOSE=yes, and AC_EXEEXT &&
AC_OBJEXT). I've tried this test on both openBSD & windows. It's failing
on both (unaltered on openBSD as it doesn't have the .exe headache).
I'm quite happy to commit some time to troubleshooting this, if you folk
want to
hm.
pr19.test fails but you post the logs from subdirbuildsources.test :)
try:
make TESTS=pr19.test check
in order to run just pr19.test
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMA
My Bad. Sorry about that noise..
correct test log :
Rob
$ make TESTS=pr19.test check
make check-TESTS
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/automake/tests'
=== Running test ./pr19.test
configure.in:8: warning: AC_PROG_LEX invoked multiple times
checking for a BSD compatible install... /bin/ins
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
| > Akim> I meant, `Makefile' must be done before `all', but not
| > Akim> `$(DATA)', which is now a dependency of all-am, not `all'.
| > Akim> There was no such distinction before, but for `config.h' (one
| > Akim> way to paraphrase the paragraph above
On Mar 12, 2001, "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well as CVS libtool (the point of the exercise :]) depends on CVS
> automake & CVS autoconf
Does it? It shouldn't. Are you sure?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer
Hmm, let me see...
http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/
"The CVS version of GNU libtool often depends on some yet to be released
versions of GNU Autoconf and GNU Automake."
Just before the "Resources" section.
Rob
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mar 13, 2001, "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "The CVS version of GNU libtool often depends on some yet to be released
^
> versions of GNU Autoconf and GNU Automake."
> Just before the "Resources" section.
AFAIK, the current CVS version of
Ok, thanks. However edward has a patch set for libtool for cygwin, which
is made against Automake CVS...
Should pr19.test and pr87.test fail on openBSD 2.8 ?
They fail'd there _without edwards patch_. Should I CVS update and test
again?
I ask because I use openBSD as my unix control point for
18 matches
Mail list logo
