Hi Simon, * Simon Josefsson wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 02:01:27PM CET: > While testing mingw32 portability (GNU SASL now builds cleanly > cross-compiled to mingw32!) I encountered the following. It seems > $(EXEXT) is required for automake TESTS variables, otherwise > 'make' misses out all CPPFLAGS etc:
TESTS which are also executables should be specified in check_PROGRAMS as well. Often, tests are scripts. With generated ones, it would not be possible to tell the difference at the time `automake' is run. See `info Automake Tests' for more information about this. I think gnulib should add executable tests to check_PROGRAMS rather than adding $(EXEEXT) as in your example. Maybe even better would be adding it to a gnulib-specific variable, and allowing the developer to add that to both TESTS and check_PROGRAMS -- the duplication you mention is IMVHO more in the eye of gnulib than of automake. Which gets me to a more general point: would the additional flexibility gained from using gnulib-specific variables in Makefile.am snippets be worth its additional cost of requiring the user to associate them with Automake variables? And no, I don't know a general answer here. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
