Repost: Newbie Questions

2002-10-31 Thread miki . shapiro
Repost on one of the questions I formerly asked (and did not find the answer to in the [wonderful] book [that I have spent the last 2 days reading cover-to-cover :-)] @ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/autobook/autobook_toc.html#SEC_Contents Here's the repost: 3. I get a Makefile, run make and

Re: Per-object *FLAGS or workaround?

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Lars" == Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Lars> Does anyone have any better suggestions? Maybe you could group these objects in a convenience library in order to use per-target flags. -- Alexandre Duret-Lutz

Re: How to specify 2 stage build in Makefile.am

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Duncan" == Duncan Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] About "multiple" implicit rules such as .a.b .c.d: ... Duncan> It's not obvious (or necessarily documented) that some Duncan> common 'make' constructions don't convert directly to Duncan> 'automake'. I've filled two PR

Re: Conditionals in Makefile.am

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Pekka" == Pekka Riikonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Pekka> I don't think changing this would be hard (haven't Pekka> looked at code though), and it doesn't cause Pekka> compatibility problems, and would make the conditionals Pekka> a lot more flexible. Ideas? I think this would

Re: Conditionals in Makefile.am

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Pekka" == Pekka Riikonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Pekka> FILES = \ Pekka> somefile.c \ Pekka> if HAVE_SOMETHING Pekka> someotherfile.c \ Pekka> endif Pekka> if HAVE_SOMETHING_ELSE Pekka> somethingelse.c \ Pekka> endif Pekka> something.c Pekka> This so

Re: Conditionals in Makefile.am

2002-10-31 Thread Pekka Riikonen
: Pekka> This sort of thing is not possible now and makes it : Pekka> really ugly to use the conditionals in makefiles, imo. : Pekka> Currently only way to do this is to conditionalize the : Pekka> entire FILES variable. Alternatively it could just : Pekka> remove the lines not to be include

Re: automake/374: Problems with ansi2knr

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "pds" == Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Paul> loadavg.c: $(srcdir)/getloadavg.c Paul> cp $(srcdir)/getloadavg.c loadavg.c [...] pds> OK, I tried automake 1.7.1 where this is fixed. It does fix this pds> problem but unfortunately there are other problems lurking.

Re: Problems executing ./configure on Solaris

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Lorrie" == Lorrie Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Lorrie> On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 11:26:15AM -0700, Lorrie Wood wrote: >> Hello, I'm having trouble using scripts generated by autoconf >> on Solaris 8. No matter what package is involved (I've tried mutt, >> ncurses, and slocate so far), t

Re: Help with @some_configure_var@ variables in automake files.

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Jerry" == Iseri, Jerry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Jerry> Is there documentation on where configuration variables are Jerry> allowed in automake files? Not in a single place. You can use them almost anywhere. Using them is tricky in a few places where they hide useful information to Aut

Re: automake/44: conditional redefinitions (Was: Re: Automake 1.6.3issue)

2002-10-31 Thread Alexandre Duret-Lutz
>>> "Akim" == Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] Akim> Nevertheless, I agree a means to install defaults would Akim> be most welcome. Akim> I suggest introducing Akim> foo ?= bar Akim> Which is always valid, but with a clear semantics. Assuming your semantic is that of BSD m

Re: Problems executing ./configure on Solaris

2002-10-31 Thread Lars Hecking
> Hi Lorrie, > > You are not talking to the right list. > > If you still think its a portability issue in ./configure, > please trace this script with `sh -x ./configure --your-flags...' > and send the output to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't believe there is such an issue. I have used all recebt

Re: Problems executing ./configure on Solaris

2002-10-31 Thread Thomas E. Dickey
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Lars Hecking wrote: > > > Hi Lorrie, > > > > You are not talking to the right list. > > > > If you still think its a portability issue in ./configure, > > please trace this script with `sh -x ./configure --your-flags...' > > and send the output to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I don'