On 28 April 2011 09:52, Jim Meyering <[email protected]> wrote: > +# The following rule is not designed to be portable, > +# and relies on tools that not everyone has.
Could the dependencies be listed in the comments, please? And perhaps even checked for during configuration (but obviously without failure if not found), and then with a check in maint.mk that fails if they were not found? Basically, just formalise the idea of a maintainer dependency. -- http://rrt.sc3d.org
