Peter T. Breuer wrote: > In comp.os.linux.development.system Sune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I read this in a really nice paper I found after >> getting in contact with the gnu guys. The guy who wrote this paper >> (when and why VPATH should be used) is a GNU guy and was heavily >> involved in implementing GNU make. I could have given you the link, but >> I leave it up to you and your neuron... > > Thanks, but the only paper I know concerning make is something like > "recursive make considered dangerous", with which I agree completely.
Sune is probably referring to http://make.paulandlesley.org/vpath.html , and a follow-up at http://make.paulandlesley.org/multi-arch.html . >> Wrong on your part. If you claim that this is _not_ a Makefile.am: > > It isn't. Well, it is. Whether or not it takes advantage of the automake system doesn't impact whether or not it is a valid Makefile.am, and it is. >> bin_PROGRAMS = collections_test >> collections_test_SOURCES = DynamicString.c test_main.c _______________________________________________ help-gnu-utils mailing list help-gnu-utils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-utils
