On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 March 2011, Dr David wrote:
>> On 03/29/11 12:19 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> > On Saturday 19 March 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> >> ABSTRACT:
>> >> The primary target of this project is to enable Automake-generat
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:04 AM, tsuna wrote:
> What would be nice would be to have the ability to recompile only the
> .java that changed. So when you edit 2/3 files, then we'd build just
> that, but in one command.
make can handle this pretty well. If all the source files are listed
as prereq
When using automake, I know how to set *FLAGS globally (ie,
AM_*FLAGS), and per binary/lib (ie bin_PROGRAMS=foo ; foo_*FLAGS =
...) However, those flag variables apply to every source file for a
given primary. What if I have multiple sources that are compiled
differently?
bin_PROGRAMS = a
a_SOUR
Ping
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:49 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>
> When using automake, I know how to set *FLAGS globally (ie,
> AM_*FLAGS), and per binary/lib (ie bin_PROGRAMS=foo ; foo_*FLAGS =
> ...) However, those flag variables apply to every source file for a
> given primary.
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 2:12 PM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> On Sunday 23 October 2011, NightStrike wrote:
>> Ping
>>
> I'm not going to look into this right now, sorry. If you want,
> please open a ticket in the automake bug tracker (by sending
> a proper mail to b
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> For cleaning non-automake-handled stuff, you can add a "clean-local:"
> rule (and "maintainer-clean-local:" etc) that does cleaning however
> you want. The automake-generated clean rule will depend on it, but
> you control what it does. For p
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Ralf Corsepius
wrote:
>> - The support for the "obscure" multilib feature has been deprecated,
>> and will be moved out of the automake core in the next major Automake
>> release (1.12).
>
> Bummer - Please reconsider this and understand that politliness
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> Harlan Stenn writes:
>> What's the problem with bin_SCRIPTS?
>
> Hmm, I didn't know about it, but ... reading the documentation,
> "bin_SCRIPTS" doesn't actually seem to do much of anything -- you
> still have to add your own rules to handle a
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> 2012年3月21日8:33 NightStrike :
>>> "bin_SCRIPTS" doesn't actually seem to do much of anything -- you
>>> still have to add your own rules to handle all the actual work, need
>>> to fiddle with EXTRA_
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, NightStrike wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes. There's an earlier email in this thread from somebody
>> illustrating that you don't need to morph from source to script if the
>> file d
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> 2012年3月21日9:32 NightStrike :
>>>> dist_bin_SCRIPTS = aaa
>>>
>>> That's going to distribute "aaa", though, right, not the actual
>>> "source" e.g. aaa.sh?
>>
>> Y
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
> 2012年3月21日13:13 NightStrike :
>> Here's a better question. How do you insure that your current file is
>> executable? Do it the same way.
>
> Er "cp $< $@ && chmod +x $@" ... :]
>
&
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
> Russ Allbery writes:
>>> [Relying on source-code execute bits always being correctly
>>> maintained is one of those things that ... well... doesn't really
>>> feel very robust. I dunno, maybe it's just me...]
>>
>> Doesn't every package with
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Vincent Torri wrote:
> Hey
>
> suppose that my program is composed of 2 files f1.c and f2.c. f1.c is
> written in C89 and f2.c in C99. I would like that f1.c is compiled
> with a C89 compiler and f2.c is compiled with a C99 compiler.
>
> How can I achieve that in
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Timothy Madden wrote:
> Hello
>
> I have automake 1.11.1 (on CentOS 6.2 x86_64), and a Makefile.am like this:
>
> AM_YFLAGS=-d
> BUILT_SOURCES=position.hh location.hh code-formatter-parser.hh stack.hh
> bin_PROGRAMS=code-formatter
> code_formatter_SOURCES=code-form
http://www.gnu.org/savannah-checkouts/gnu/automake/manual/html_node/Optional.html
This link says that the canonical macros will make
build/host/target_triplet make variables available. What's the
difference between using for instance $target and $target_triplet?
Will they always be the same? Why
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
> hey
>
> I want to delete the .la file installed by libtool (note that i don't
> want to discuss if it's reasonnable or not to delete these files)
>
> So, in my Makefile.am, I do:
>
> lib_LTLIBRARIES = libevil.la
> ...
> ...
> install-data-hoo
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 10/03/2012 05:29 PM, Rudra Banerjee wrote:
>>
>> Yes,
>> I got some site on non-recursive automake.
>> But I have one more queries: I have 100+ routine in src/.
>> Do I need to enter ALL of them manually as automake do not like
>> wildcar
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> Thanks to everyone for your feedback. Much appreciated.
>
> It seems that merging libtool into Automake would be an unpopular move all
> around, with significant downsides for users, so I no longer plan to do
> that... unless there is a s
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Björn Stenberg wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> Couldn't you simply add a 'buil-tests' target that creates
>> all the programs in $(TESTS)? Something as simple as:
>>
>> build-tests: $(TESTS)
>>
>> Then run it on the build system, before running "make chec
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> I suspect that this anaysis has been mentioned on the Automake list before
> but (if so) it is worth looking at again. It seems that few packages
> benefit significantly from parallel builds. Many packages use Automake, but
> they use it
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Václav Zeman wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I am looking for a good example of a project with non-recursive Make
> that is using Automake, that is not trivial. I would like to convert my
> project, log4cplus, to non-recursive Make style, if it is possible. Any
> recommendations
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 5:25 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Peter Johansson wrote:
>>
>> Makefile.am [in topdir]. For those fragment files, it would probably be
>> confusing if paths were inserted into variables. Perhaps one could have a
>> switch to turn that feature on.
>
>
>
I was looking in the manual to see what the default definition of
AM_CFLAGS was. It's gone. Instead, all I see is this:
AM_CFLAGS
This is the variable the Makefile.am author can use to pass in
additional C compiler flags. It is more fully documented elsewhere. In
some situations, this is not use
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò
wrote:
> On 09/12/2012 17:32, NightStrike wrote:
>> It's not more fully documented elsewhere, though. AM_CPPFLAGS right
>> about it is, however, fully documented right in this section. This
>> should be fixed, since n
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:28 PM, David Boesner wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>
> I'm working on a PAM module. Therefore it is necessary to create a shared
> object in
> /lib/security. That words fine. My problem is, that the .la file is also
> created next to the so file.
> That's why I would like to e
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> I should at this point decide whether just devote my "Automake time"
> to mainline Automake (which amounts at letting Automake-NG die,
> basically) or to Automake-NG (after tying some loose ends in the
> mainline Automake code base, of cou
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Vincent Torri wrote:
> Hey
>
> In MSYS, the following code is not "silent" (sed_process is a sed command) :
>
>
> pc_verbose = $(pc_verbose_@AM_V@)
> pc_verbose_ = $(pc_verbose_@AM_DEFAULT_V@)
> pc_verbose_0 = @echo " PC " $@;
>
> etui.pc: $(top_srcdir)/etui
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> This is a long-standing bug in our project and I've yet to figure out
> how to address it.
>
> The project is primarily a library that once installed has a "front end"
> installed in libdir and N "back ends" (linked by libtool with the
> '-m
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> We are pleased to announce the GNU Automake 1.14 minor release.
>
> This release comes with two important changes:
>
> 1. It introduces a new feature aimed at making the implementation
> of non-recursive build systems more convenie
With the latest automake on archi linux, I get this:
Unescaped left brace in regex is deprecated, passed through in regex;
marked by <-- HERE in m/\${ <-- HERE ([^ \t=:+{}]+)}/ at
/usr/bin/automake line 3936.
1.15
On May 9, 2016 4:38 AM, "Philipp Thomas" wrote:
> * NightStrike (nightstr...@gmail.com) [20160506 18:50]:
> > With the latest automake on archi linux,
>
> Which is ('automake --version' tells you)?
>
> > I get this:
> > Unescaped left bra
Thanks!
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 1:42 AM, Philipp Thomas wrote:
> * NightStrike (nightstr...@gmail.com) [20160510 04:20]:
>
>
>> 1.15
>
> This has been fixed in git with commit
> 13f00eb4493c217269b76614759e452d8302955e :
>
> diff --git a/bin/automake.in b/bin/automa
Can you undeprecate Java?
https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Java.html
I know the support isn't perfect, but it is useful when you have a
large project that incorporates both Java and other languages, and you
want to keep yourself in the make world instead of having to have bo
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Václav Haisman wrote:
> On 18.8.2016 21:12, NightStrike wrote:
>> Can you undeprecate Java?
>>
>> https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Java.html
>>
>> I know the support isn't perfect, but it is useful
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> Hello,
>
>Currently Automake supports two ways of compiling Java code. One is
> with the 'javac' compiler which is deprecated on the Automake side, and
> the other (the recommanded one) which uses GCJ. Relying on GCJ feels
> outdated
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Gavin Smith
wrote:
> On 25 February 2018 at 19:13, Jonas Thiem wrote:
> > Disclaimer: I haven't read this part of the docs myself. But for what
> > it's worth, I think Maude looks a bit like a misspelling of Make and
> > doesn't stick out that well, compared to
On Mar 7, 2018 16:05, "Mathieu Lirzin" wrote:
John Calcote writes:
> Hi Matthias,
>
> If you have any suggestions on documents I can read or software I can
check
>> to
>> prepare for this project I'll be glad to check them. I know texinfo is
>> written
>> in Perl and generates an AST so I'll ch
On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 5:34 AM Thomas Jahns wrote:
> > - Our code is a mix of Fortran and C, with a bit of C++. Automake still
> > deos not support Fortran 90-type module dependencies, so we have to manage
> > manual dependencies in one of our Makefile.am's. More modern systems handle
> > Fort
On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 4:44 PM Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 6 May 2021, Karl Berry wrote:
> >
> > (*) https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2021-03/msg00018.html
> > So far the response has been nil.
>
> I don't recall seeing that email. I did see an email thread regarding
> Autoconf
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 6:01 PM Bob Friesenhahn
wrote:
> The people who tell me it is more portable are very interested in
> targeting Microsoft Windows.
Introduce them to mingw-w64.sf.net + msys2 :) I heard good things
about those :P
> The "Makefiles" that Cmake generates are self-referential
I see no messages in the archives for this list for the past two
years. Is this list dead? If so, where is the appropriate place for
receiving automake support?
On 8/9/07, Noah Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I see no messages in the archives for this list for the past two
> > years. Is this list dead? If so, where is the appropriate place for
> > receiving automake support?
>
> This is a very low volume list - but not /that/ low volume.
>
> You mu
Since this list is obviously not dead, here's my first of several questions:
(this is all with automake 1.10)
How do I individually override everything that takes place for a given
target? For example, if I have this:
lib_LIBRARIES = libmylib.a
libmylib_a_SOURCES = source1.c source2.c
The resu
On 8/9/07, Noah Slater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm looking here:
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/automake/
>
> You're guess is a good as mine, sorry.
I'm assuming that means that it's blank for you, too, then. Has
nobody been checking the archives since 2005?
On 8/9/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 04:49:00PM CEST:
> >
> > How do I individually override everything that takes place for a given
> > target?
>
> I don't think there is a general way to do that
On 8/9/07, Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi again :)
>
>
> in a different project, I have a number of files that have the same
> filename, but live in different directories, for example
>
> project/module1/hooks.c
> project/module1/m1.c
> project/module2/hooks.
On 8/10/07, Bernd Jendrissek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/10/07, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For a particular project, there are a handful of .c files that need to
> > be compiled to .o files and installed as .o files, not linked into any
> >
On 8/10/07, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/10/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -- Original message --
> > From: NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Since this list is obvi
On 8/10/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -- Original message --
> From: NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Since this list is obviously not dead, here's my first of several questions:
> >
> > (this is
On 8/10/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:00:21AM CEST:
> > On 8/9/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * NightStrike wrote on Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 04:49:00PM CEST:
> > > >
&
Updates..
On 8/11/07, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/10/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:00:21AM CEST:
> > > On 8/9/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
On 8/12/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 04:50:21PM CEST:
> >
> > Update: It would appear that the automake manual needs to be updated,
> > as the described AC_OUTPUT usage is deprecated. How do we
On 8/15/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Note all the ".cpp" files and the AM_CXXFLAGS and AM_LDFLAGS. The cpp
> > files vary over time and I have to refresh the list every time. Is there
> > anyway to declare something like *.cpp??
>
> No. The limitation is intentional, be
On 8/15/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 12:07:17AM CEST:
> > On 8/12/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > * NightStrike wrote on Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 04:50:21PM CEST:
> > > >
On 8/16/07, Jason Curl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NightStrike wrote:
> > Why is this not a toggleable option of some sort? Why force a user
> > into a difficult situation that will end up having a kludgey
> > workaround? (like something that auto-generates the m
On 9/30/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> several GNU projects (including autoconf) have moved to Git, is there
Just curious... why git over svn?
If I do:
lib_LIBRARIES = libfoo.a
libfoo_a_SOURCES = foo.c
in the Makefile.am, libfoo.a will be installed into $(prefix)/lib. If
I am using AC_CANONICAL_SYSTEM in configure.ac, I want to be able to
set build, host, and target for building a cross compiler. I would
then want the above library to
Where is $(COMPILE) documented? When should it be used? What does it
actually get set to?
On 10/16/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2007, at 10:05 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > Where is $(COMPILE) documented?
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Program-
> variables.html#index-COMPILE-494
>
> > When sho
On 10/16/07, Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > Where is $(COMPILE) documented? When should it be used? What does it
> > actually get set to?
>
> Read a generated Makefile and all secrets will be revealed.
On 10/16/07, Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > Where is $(COMPILE) documented? When should it be used? What does it
> > actually get set to?
>
> Read a generated Makefile and all secrets will be revealed
If I place something inside the primary "_LIBRARIES", for instance
libmine.a, when I do a make install after doing a make, make runs
ranlib on that library. Why is ranlib run during make install instead
of during make all?
I am trying to build a Makefile.am file "correctly". This is what I
have so far:
http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/buildsystem/Makefile.am?revision=137&view=markup
Some issues that I've noted include installing all libraries as
executables instead of 644 (due to
On 10/16/07, Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, NightStrike wrote:
>
> Regarding your question about executable DLLs, if you take a look in
> your Windows System directory you will see that DLLs are marked as
> executable. Traditionally DLL
On 10/16/07, Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > If I place something inside the primary "_LIBRARIES", for instance
> > libmine.a, when I do a make install after doing a make, make runs
> > ranlib on
On 10/19/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | # These targets require special handling that automake can't
> | # yet support (or that I don't know how to do properly)
> | crtdir=$(prefix)/$(target)/lib
> | crt_SCRIPTS = \
> | crt1.o crt2.
>
> There is nothing inherently wrong with d
On 10/19/07, Andreas Schwab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ok. I just tested your idea, and I am going to move all .a custom
> > targets to a _DATA primary, and leave the _SCRIPTS primary for just
> > the custom
On 10/19/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:14:22PM CEST:
> >
> > Should static libraries be executable?
>
> They need not be. But it's no problem if they are.
Ok. I just tested your idea, and I am goi
On 10/19/07, Harlan Stenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why worry about which library files should be executable and which ones
> are not?
>
> Would it be easier to use:
>
> foodir=/where/ever
> foo_LIBRARIES = ...
>
> and let the generated Makefile handle getting the permissions right?
For 8 or
ping..
On 10/16/07, NightStrike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am trying to build a Makefile.am file "correctly". This is what I
> have so far:
>
> http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/buildsystem/Makefile.am?revision=137&view=markup
If I wanted -pipe passed in to gcc all the time, do I put that in
AM_CPPFLAGS or AM_CFLAGS?
On 10/21/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 09:25:08PM CEST:
> >
> > crt_SCRIPTS = libcrtdll.a libmsvcrt.a libmsvcr80.a
> > libcrtdll.a libmsvcrt.a libmsvcr80.a:
> > base=`echo
On 10/21/07, Brian Dessent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> > Well, I could tell you that Libtool can create DLLs plus import
> > libraries (it names them libfoo.dll.a), but I don't think you want
> > to hear that at this point. ;-)
>
> Libtool isn't appropriate here because
On 10/26/07, Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This looks more like an automake question, so I've redirected the mail
> accordingly. Perhaps the answer already lies in the automake manual, in
> creating your own suffix rules:
>
> http://sourceware.org/automake/automake.html#index-Adding-new-
On 10/11/07, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI, I added support for LZMA[1] compression a few days ago:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2007-10/msg3.html
>
> So now you can put this in your configure.ac file
> AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([dist-lzma])
> and "make dist
On 11/2/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 05:43:05PM CET:
> > On 11/2/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > AC_CHECK_TOOL(DLLTOOL, dlltool, false)
> >
> > How does that handle c
Currently, the macro AC_PROG_LIBTOOL will search for dlltool and
define $(DLLTOOL) appropriately. If I only want dlltool itself and
not the rest of the libtool package, is there some sort of
AC_PROG_DLLTOOL macro available? The issue is that I need ranlib, and
using both AC_PROG_RANLIB And AC_PRO
On 11/2/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello NightStrike, whoever you are,
Hi :)
> * NightStrike wrote on Fri, Nov 02, 2007 at 05:29:01PM CET:
> > Currently, the macro AC_PROG_LIBTOOL will search for dlltool and
> > define $(DLLTOOL) appropriately.
Is there a difference between using AC_PROG_LIBTOOL and
AM_PROG_LIBTOOL? I see both defined in the manual as synonymous, but
I may not be looking at the right place in the manual.
There are variables like AM_CFLAGS and AM_LDFLAGS. Is there an
AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS variable that can be used to pass common parameters to
dlltool?
I am trying to figure out how to do conditional sources. Basically,
here is the setup:
lib/uuid.c
lib32/uuid.c
If I pass --with-m32 to configure, I want to use the second source.
If I don't, then I want to use the first. I put this in configure.ac:
AC_ARG_WITH(m32,
[ --with-m32 Compile lib3
On 11/4/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:26:51PM CET:
> > Is there a difference between using AC_PROG_LIBTOOL and
> > AM_PROG_LIBTOOL? I see both defined in the manual as synonymous, but
> > I may not be lo
On 11/4/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 07:28:27PM CET:
> > There are variables like AM_CFLAGS and AM_LDFLAGS. Is there an
> > AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS variable that can be used to pass common parameters to
> > dlltool
On 11/4/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2007, at 7:47 PM, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > I am trying to figure out how to do conditional sources. Basically,
> > here is the setup:
> >
> > lib/uuid.c
> > lib32/uuid.c
> >
> >
On 11/4/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Nov 4, 2007, at 7:47 PM, NightStrike wrote:
> > > > AM_CONDITIONAL(WITH32, test x$WITH_32 != x)
> > > >
> > > > And I put this in Makefile.am:
> > > >
> > > >
On 11/4/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Please learn about `subdir-objects', that helps. It's indexed in the
> manual.
Ok, that has actually helped in multiple ways. I am now using that
option, and it's good. That gets me past one hurdle. Now I am left
with the following:
F
On 11/5/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 06:01:26AM CET:
> >
> > lib32dir=$(prefix)/lib32
> > lib64dir=$(prefix)/lib64
> >
> > lib32_LIBRARIES = libuuid.a
> > libuuid_a_SOURCES = lib
On 11/6/07, Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi list,
> would anyone be against the introduction of AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD
> (before the release of 1.11) to be more consistent with the existing
> AM_*flags?
Can you add to that also AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS?
On 10/21/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello whoever(?),
>
> * NightStrike wrote on Sun, Oct 21, 2007 at 07:13:19PM CEST:
> > If I wanted -pipe passed in to gcc all the time, do I put that in
> > AM_CPPFLAGS or AM_CFLAGS?
>
> You pass
I just came across the multilib section of the automake manual:
http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#Multilibs
How can I find the status on this? How "experimental" is "experimental"?
Currently, it's possible to define flags for the general case and for
specific targets. For instance, the following:
AM_CFLAGS = -flag1
foo_LIBRARIES = liba.a libb.a
liba_a_SOURCES = a.c
liba_a_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -flag2
libb_a_SOURCES = b.c
libb_b_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -flag3
However, is it
On 11/6/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can you add to that also AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS?
>
> It's been mentioned before: Automake currently does not use dlltool.
> What would AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS be for then? Support for it would be a null
> change. Just put $(AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS) into your se
On 11/6/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 07:02:55PM CET:
> >
> > Is it possible to specify something like foo_CFLAGS for all libraries
> > that get installed into that directory, but not affect the general
>
On 11/6/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * NightStrike wrote on Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 07:09:21PM CET:
> > On 11/6/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Can you add to that also AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS?
> > >
> > > It'
I hit another snag in my project. I am building a runtime as a
component of a cross compiler. Configure has to determine the various
tools to use (denoted by passing --host=xx to configure), and I use
all of the AC_PROG_XX macros. This may be an autoconf issue instead
of automake, but what happe
On Nov 18, 2007 10:11 AM, Benoit Sigoure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 18, 2007, at 9:02 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>
> > I hit another snag in my project. I am building a runtime as a
> > component of a cross compiler. Configure has to determine the various
&
On 11/18/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This is an Autoconf issue, not an Automake one.
I thought as much.
> GCC has similar issues, too, and they use hacks like GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES
> to work around the issues, see
> gcc/config/no-executables.m4
>
> in the GCC source
I'm getting pretty finalized on the automake build system for my
project. I was wondering, however, if anyone would mind going over
the configure.ac and Makefile.am files to proofread them and give any
suggestions, for instance if you see a better way to do things or if
it should be formatted diff
On 12/7/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Ting,
>
> * susan xie wrote on Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 06:53:03PM CET:
> > >
> > > I have a third-party static library distributed with my software
> > > package, and I want to install it into the libraries during 'make
> > > install'. Do
1 - 100 of 192 matches
Mail list logo
