Freebsd vs built sources

2006-07-12 Thread John Darrington
My project is getting a number of complaints that the makefiles dont work on BSD (and one or two other platforms). It seems that automake generates non-portable makefiles when it comes to built sources. Our build system is rather large, but a simplified one is somthing like: $(top_builddir)/

Re: Freebsd vs built sources

2006-07-12 Thread Stepan Kasal
Hello, On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 08:13:06PM +0800, John Darrington wrote: > $(top_builddir)/subdir/mystuff.c: $(top_srcdir)/subdir/mystuff.x > cp $(top_srcdir)/subdir/mystuff.x $(top_builddir)/subdir/mystuff.c > > CLEANFILES= $(top_builddir)/subdir/mystuff.c ... > mystuff_libstuff_a_SOURCE

Re: Freebsd vs built sources

2006-07-12 Thread John Darrington
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 02:33:21PM +0200, Stepan Kasal wrote: Hello, On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 08:13:06PM +0800, John Darrington wrote: > $(top_builddir)/subdir/mystuff.c: $(top_srcdir)/subdir/mystuff.x > cp $(top_srcdir)/subdir/mystuff.x $(top_builddir)/subdir/myst

Dependencies in a single Makefile.am

2006-07-12 Thread Hugo de Paix de Coeur
Hello all.. I've a dependency problem: I build two libraries in a single Makefile.am: - an independent shared library - a module library (dlopen...) linked on the shared library the 'make' step do not cause any problems thanks to the _DEPENDENCIES tag, but the tag is not respected at the 'mak

Re: proposal for fdl module

2006-07-12 Thread Karl Berry
> 2) Similarly for texinfo.tex: It would be better for packages using gnulib to get texinfo.tex from gnulib. It's (nearly always) newer. Of course, not all automake-using packages use gnulib. So then getting texinfo.tex from automake is useful (I guess). So, does automake refrain from inst