On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/2/14, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The current Makefile.am are not quite correct. > > > They put the generated files into the tarball, but not the *.in files. > > > They also don't clean up some of the generated files. > > > > > > This patch address that. It also simplifies the Makefile.amS a bit and > > > uses a more consistent naming for the install dirs. > > > > > > This is good (I hadn't noticed before about the missing .in files in > > dist), but I think there are two improvements still to make: > > > > - The transformed scripts (e.g., pm-action) are also distributed, > > They shouldn't. I haven't added them to EXTRA_DIST.
You're right. I thought when I tested they were distributed. > > meaning you'll have a copy of whoever did `make dist'. This can be > > avoided by using nodist_*_SCRIPTS for the ones that are transformed. > > The CLEANFILES setting has to change to match. > > > > - Instead of adding the non-transformed scripts into EXTRA_DIST, add > > the dist_ prefix to their *_SCRIPTS variables. > > I chose that purposefully. > > pm_bin_SCRIPTS = \ > pm-action > > (Using dist_pm_bin_SCRIPTS is not good, we only want pm-action.in) > > bin_SCRIPTS = \ > pm-is-supported \ > on_ac_power > > (we only want on_ac_power and pm-is-supported.in. so dist_bin_SCRIPTS > does not what we want) I meant separately: bin_SCRIPTS = pm-is-supported dist_bin_SCRIPS = on_ac_power and drop on_ac_power from EXTRA_DIST. Not a big deal, but I'm not a big fan of stuffing everything into EXTRA_DIST when automake has other facilities to accomplish it. > > What do you think? > > I think my patch is correct as is. Certainly. -- Dan _______________________________________________ Pm-utils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-utils
