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)/
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
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
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
> 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