Hello.
I have to compile and link a Fortran 77 test program. and then run it
redirecting its stdout/stderr (I need to do so to verify that the `stop'
builtin is silent when called without arguments -- unfortunately this is
not always the case, e.g. when using gfortran-4.0).
I thought at first to
At Tuesday 13 October 2009, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 09:20:04PM CEST:
I have to compile and link a Fortran 77 test program. and then
run it redirecting its stdout/stderr (I need to do so to verify
that the `stop' builtin
At Tuesday 13 October 2009, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de
wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 03:22:51PM CEST:
What matters to me is that the *program generated* by the
compiler, when executed, is not too verbose w.r.t. the `stop'
builtin.
Then you should
At Wednesday 14 October 2009, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de
wrote:
Sorry; I forgot to add: In the ACTION-IF-TRUE argument of
AC_RUN_IFELSE, you can invoke ./conftest$EXEEXT yourself and see
what it does.
Oh. This is exactly what I need. Thank you very much!
Maybe the autoconf
At Monday 03 May 2010, Lukas Kaser lukas.ka...@googlemail.com wrote:
Dear List,
since some weeks I'm working with autotools and I am wondering if
some experienced users/developers wrote about best practices with
this tools. Some guideline through the whole process up to packing
could help
At Tuesday 25 May 2010, Alex Farber alexf.ac...@gmail.com wrote:
./configure WX_CPP=compiler flags... WX_LIBS=linker flags...
This doesn't work, because AC_SUBST is done when configure script
is generated, and not when it is executed.
No, this doesn't work because you are setting the WX_CPP
At Tuesday 25 May 2010, Václav Haisman v.hais...@sh.cvut.cz wrote:
Hi.
Is it possible to reuse whatever AC_LANG_PROGRAM() produces?
I'm not an expert about this macro. but I'd do something like this:
m4_define([MY_PROLOGUE], [whatever])
m4_define([MY_BODY], [whatever2])
At Tuesday 25 May 2010, Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com wrote:
At Tuesday 25 May 2010, Václav Haisman v.hais...@sh.cvut.cz wrote:
Hi.
Is it possible to reuse whatever AC_LANG_PROGRAM() produces?
I'm not an expert about this macro. but I'd do something like
Hello Vincent.
Your snippet works correctly on my system (debian unstalbe, m4 1.4.13,
autoconf 2.65).
Which version of m4 do you have? What happens if you change the definition
of `v_rev' to:
m4_define([v_rev], m4_esyscmd([(svnversion . | grep -v exported || echo 0) |
awk -F : '{printf(%s,
Hello Raphael.
At Wednesday 02 June 2010, Raphael 'kena' Poss wrote:
m4_define([v_rev], m4_esyscmd([(svnversion . | grep -v exported || echo 0)
| awk -F : '{printf(%s, $1);}' | tr 'A-z' ' ' | sed 's/ //g']))
you probably want to add
| tr -d '\n'
to that command line, to remove
At Wednesday 02 June 2010, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/02/2010 03:25 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Souldn't the printf(%s, $1) already taking care of the newline
removal?
Yes, but sed adds it back in.
I wasn't aware of this sed feature. Thanks for pointing it out
At Sunday 25 July 2010, Philip Prindeville wrote:
Hi.
We're passing a lot of information into configure manually because
a lot of packages didn't used to handle cross-compilation
correctly, but lately those packages have been getting better.
We'd like to start to peel away options that
Hi Eric.
At Tuesday 27 July 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/27/2010 03:08 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/27/2010 02:58 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
+# Let user choose which version of autoconf to use.
+AUTOCONF=${AUTOCONF-autoconf}
+
I'm used to this variant, with less typing
[Removing automake-patches from CC]
At Tuesday 27 July 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/27/2010 03:37 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I'm used to this variant, with less typing:
: ${AUTOCONF=autoconf}
But your way works, too.
Can you confirm it's as portable as the ways suggested
On Saturday 21 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Apologies for the slightly off-topic message, but the German
wikipedia entry for autotools contains a number of inaccuracies
and bias against it.
FWIW, this is true also for the English wikipedia entry for autoconf
(but *not* for the automake
On Monday 06 September 2010, Matthias Wichtlhuber wrote:
Hi list,
Hello Matthias.
this is my first post here, so I hope this is the right list
Yes, it is.
and I am not violating the netiquette.
I'm a complete autoconf newbie. For a small project I want to test,
whether the cuda NVCC
On Monday 06 September 2010, Matthias Wichtlhuber wrote:
Hi,
first let me thank you for your answer.
It seems to me that you are *greatly* misunderstanding how
autoconf works. Have you read any tutorial about the autotools?
If not, I suggest
[adding autoconf@gnu.org and autom...@gnu.org]
On Monday 06 September 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Have you read any tutorial about the autotools? If not, I
suggest this: http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~adl/autotools.html,
which I find it very clear, and which helped me a lot in the
Hello autoconfers.
Is anyone aware of this ridicoulous bug of Solaris 10 /bin/ksh?
$ uname -a
SunOS ... 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i86pc i386 i86pc
$ strings /bin/ksh | grep -i version
@(#)Version M-11/16/88i
$ /bin/ksh -c 'test -z ); echo $?' # ready to laugh or cry?
0
$ /bin/sh -c 'test -z
Hi Eric.
On Tuesday 07 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
Therefore,
$ /bin/ksh -c 'test -z ); echo $?' # ready to laugh or cry?
0
this is yet another case of @var{string} that looks like an
operator, and yet another reason that you should ALWAYS use test
x$val = x rather than test
On Wednesday 15 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
On 09/15/2010 09:34 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
- [ $LINENO AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FD])])
+ [ $LINENO AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FD ])])
How nice of Debian to not tell upstream about the issue :(
Does anyone know which Debian bug this patch is supposed
Hi Eric, Ralf.
Sorry for the late answer, but I'm experiencing some hardware
problems :-(
Future answers (for some time at least) might be late for the same
reason.
On Tuesday 12 October 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hi Eric,
* Eric Blake wrote on Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 05:59:39PM CEST:
I'm
Hello Javier.
On Sunday 26 December 2010, Javier Jardón wrote:
Hello,
currently in GNOME we use a custom macro to add more compiler warnings
to the build [1]
I wonder if there is a upstream macro to do the same.
You might be interested in the gnulib modules `warnings' and `manywarnings':
On Thursday 10 February 2011, Dr David wrote:
I know its considered bad practice to check for an empty string with
something like:
if [ $STR = ] ; then
but what shells do actually break with this, and under what conditions?
Solaris 10 /bin/sh breaks with [ $var != ] for some (very
Hello autoconfers. Just my 2 cents about the issue ...
On Tuesday 29 March 2011, NightStrike wrote:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:35 AM, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de
wrote:
Hello Jim,
* Jim Galarowicz wrote on Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 09:08:02PM CEST:
I was wondering if anyone can
[adding automake and bug-automake lists]
[follow-ups might drop autoconf list IMHO]
[Reference: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2011-04/msg00072.html]
Hello Justin and Ralf, and sorry for the delay.
On Saturday 30 April 2011, Justin wrote:
On 4/29/11 8:57 PM, Ralf Corsepius
On Monday 20 June 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 06/20/2011 12:45 PM, David Doria wrote:
I cloned autoconf with git clone git://git.sv.gnu.org/autoconf
in the README is says see INSTALL, but I don't see an INSTALL file?
The README file is intended for those users building autoconf from a
Hi Eric.
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/16/2011 10:04 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
The proper fix is even easier BTW: just use $$exit || exit 1 instead.
The updated patch should now work (and I've tested it properly this time).
This new patch hasn't been derived
[dropping bug-automake, adding autoconf-patches]
References:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9245
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159730
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Eric.
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/16/2011 10:04
Hi Bob.
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I'll have a draft patch read soonish. There is ample room for
improvements,
but I'll post it here anyway since it can benefit from early feedback.
Here it is. As usual, comments
[adding automake list in CC:]
Hi Cédric. Please note that questions about automake should be
sent to the automake list, not to the autoconf one. Thanks.
On Monday 26 September 2011, GAVA Cédric wrote:
Dear all
I am trying to pass -Wall option to AM_AUTOMAKE :
I guess you mean
[Me going through oldish backlogs ...]
On Thursday 14 April 2011, Paul Eggert wrote:
On 04/13/2011 11:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
If the intended use is only for ansi2knr, I'd even argue that it
should be off by default ... how many people care about ansi2knr
anymore?
Nobody. It would be
On Wednesday 23 November 2011, Peter Fodrek wrote:
Dear autotools experts,
I am stranger in builtools like autotols. My practice in Unix based C and
Java
programming using manually created Makefiles lasts 15 years.
I am able to produce both ELF binaries (from C source code and java
Hi Nick and Eric.
On 12/20/2011 09:49 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
On 2011-12-20 15:35 -0500, Eric Gorr wrote:
What appears to work is the following...
aclocal -I /usr/local/share/aclocal
autoconf
What I am not sure of is how to confirm just what directories will be
searched for
Hello autoconfers.
Recently, various improvements and extensions have been committed to the section
of the Autoconf manual dealing with Shell portability problems (Shellology).
Unfortunately, these improvements don't yet appear in the version of the manual
available on the web. That's not
Severity: minor
thanks
In the Automake repository, I'm seeing this:
$ git grep F77FLAGS
lib/Automake/Variable.pm: F77FLAGS = 'AC_PROG_F77',
$ grep -C 10 F77FLAGS lib/Automake/Variable.pm
# Macros shipped with Autoconf.
my %_ac_macro_for_var =
(
ALLOCA = 'AC_FUNC_ALLOCA',
On 01/19/2012 02:45 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
[SNIP]
So, to all autoconfers: do you happen to know any reason for which Automake
should use F77FLAGS? If not, I'll assume that is due to a typo or clerical
mistake, and fix it (in 48 hours or so).
The attached patch should take care
Hello autoconfers.
What would you think about the suggestion of rolling out a new autoconf
release in the next week or so? I'd like to see this happen for at
least the following reasons:
* Automake's own configure.ac (in master) needs the commit bd962acf
fortran: define $GFC to yes if $FC is
On 02/23/2012 11:49 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
Eric wrote:
The autoconf manual still recommends:
Do not use @samp{test -x}, because 4.3BSD does not
have it.
Is this still an issue? Or should we be updating the autoconf manual?
I remember this biting me within the last ~4 years' time.
I
On 02/24/2012 12:45 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 02/23/2012 04:39 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I'll take it from here, if you'd like,
Oh yes, I would :-)
since I've done probes before, so I know where to edit.
Thanks,
Stefano
___
Autoconf mailing
On 02/28/2012 05:51 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
[adding autoconf]
On 02/28/2012 09:42 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Ah, likely the famous ksh bug with $@ and empty arguments:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake-patches/2009-12/msg00037.html
See automake bug#10898.
At least
Hello autoconfers.
I think it's clear to everybody that a true POSIX shell has several real
advantages over a legacy Bourne shell (like, say, the dreaded Solaris /bin/sh).
And I don't know of any non-museum system that doesn't have a POSIX shell
*somewhere*.
So, what would you think about the
Hi Eric, all.
On 03/02/2012 05:45 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
The GNU Autoconf team is pleased to announce the beta release of
Autoconf 2.68b.
[SNIP]
What is the status on this? Is the 2.69 release going to appear soon, or
there are still loose ends to tie?
Regards,
Stefano
On 03/23/2012 10:10 AM, Christopher Howard wrote:
On 03/21/2012 03:39 PM, Christopher Howard wrote:
Hi. I'm still working on learning autotools (been reading through all
the manuals) so bear with me. There is something I've been trying to
figure out, and I would appreciate any guidance:
So,
On 03/20/2012 06:38 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Eric, all.
On 03/02/2012 05:45 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
The GNU Autoconf team is pleased to announce the beta release of
Autoconf 2.68b.
[SNIP]
What is the status on this? Is the 2.69 release going to appear soon, or
there are still
Hi Eric, Russ.
On 04/25/2012 01:08 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 04/24/2012 04:50 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com writes:
Help! I can't release autoconf 2.69 until I figure out how to work
around this patch. After updating to the latest shared files, as well
as applying
Hi Eric, sorry for the delay.
On 04/25/2012 01:25 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
Actually, this appears to make _all_ the XFile uses work; all that
remains broken is places such as bin/autoupdate.in calling raw open
instead of using XFile.
diff --git i/lib/Autom4te/XFile.pm w/lib/Autom4te/XFile.pm
[SNIP]
Eric Blake wrote:
Alas, my perl-fu is weak enough that I'm not sure how good my
unit-testing attempts would be. But moving the files to a common
repository seems doable (how about gnulib?).
I replied:
This could be a good interim solution, as I the paperwork in place for
Gnulib,
Hi Bob.
On 05/23/2012 02:17 AM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
The forthcoming Automake release is about to break the means I have been
using to automatically version my package (without manually editing
configure.ac) for the past 9 years.
I smell a misunderstanding here: Automake 1.12.1 will only
Hi Eric.
On 06/26/2012 06:27 PM, Akim Demaille wrote:
Le 26 juin 2012 à 18:18, Eric Blake a écrit :
Just from reading this summary, the idea of improving AC_PROG_LEX and
AC_PROG_YACC to be more useful makes sense, especially if it would make
automake easier to maintain. What sort of
On 06/26/2012 09:12 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
[SNIP]
And not mentioned in my proposed commit message, but I specifically kept
mdate-sh as one of the mirrored files, even though Stefano originally
suggested that it might be automake-centric; that particular script is
small enough to be useful in
Hi Bob, I managed to find your old message about dynamically computing
package versions for Automake and Autoconf. Some initial comments
follows. I'm adding the Autoconf list in CC:, because I believe this
is an Autoconf issue more than an Automake one.
On 05/20/2012 12:59 AM, Bob Friesenhahn
[Adding the Automake and Autoconf list, as this might be of public interest]
On 08/19/2012 05:48 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Something I notice is that Automake's configure.ac contains an
elaborate testing of shells resulting in a AM_TEST_RUNNER_SHELL
definition which is used for the Bourne
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2012-08/msg00025.html
On 08/15/2012 12:16 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Bob, I managed to find your old message about dynamically computing
package versions for Automake and Autoconf. Some initial comments
follows. I'm adding
On 08/24/2012 11:43 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2012-08/msg00025.html
On 08/15/2012 12:16 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Bob, I managed to find your old message about dynamically computing
package versions for Automake and Autoconf
On 09/23/2012 08:31 PM, Brandon Invergo wrote:
[SNIP]
python.m4 in Automake is much more complete, and these macros are the
direct decendents of that file, but to me at least, it's confusing that
these macros should be implemented in Automake and not in Autoconf (or
Autoconf Archive for
[+cc autoconf]
On 11/14/2012 07:45 AM, Sebastian Freundt wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
tags 12877 + moreinfo
thanks
Hi Sebastian, thanks for the report.
On 11/13/2012 11:30 AM, Sebastian Freundt wrote:
shell automake --version
automake (GNU automake
tags 12877 - moreinfo
tags 12877 notabug
close 12877
thanks
On 11/14/2012 12:09 PM, Sebastian Freundt wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
On 11/14/2012 07:45 AM, Sebastian Freundt wrote:
(GNU) m4 when being called with the variable POSIXLY_CORRECT behaves
On 11/14/2012 12:24 PM, Sebastian Freundt wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
Yes, I will report this issue to the m4 guys.
1.9a has the -g switch and is newer than 1.4 anyway.
Oh, sorry, I has misread the version number as 1.4.9a *blush*!
I agree a report
On 11/19/2012 07:36 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 11/19/2012 10:09 AM, Adam Mercer wrote:
Hi
For one of my projects I need to get the contents of
/etc/redhat-release during the configure process and assign the
contents to a variable. I'm currently using the following:
redhat_release=`cat
On 11/24/2012 09:16 AM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
On 2 March 2012 06:45, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
The Autoconf team is considering releasing only .xz files for 2.69; if
this would be a hardship for you, and you need the .gz or .bz2 release,
please speak up now.
I just encountered
Hi Eduardo.
On 12/11/2012 12:57 AM, Eduardo Costa wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible at all to have a configure option whose help message can
expand a
variable, or can otherwise accept the output of a command at configure-time?
For example, imagine this as part of the output of `./configure':
On 12/13/2012 11:22 PM, Eduardo Costa wrote:
Thanks guys,
I actually sent a solution much like yours Nick. Don't know
why Stefano didn't send my answer.
You mean this part?
This might be done by usual means (couldn't do it) or just with some
trickery to to inject the string manually at
On 01/07/2013 04:04 AM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
FYI
Recent automake-1.13 release has been keeping me busy as I try to fix
the majority (it feels) of FOSS projects upon which it fails, due to
AM_CONFIG_HEADER having been removed.
That had actually been my fault, since I mistakenly didn't
[Moving to the Automake list, that is the correct place for this dicussion]
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2013-01/msg4.html
On 01/07/2013 04:04 AM, Marko Lindqvist wrote:
FYI
Recent automake-1.13 release has been keeping me busy as I try to fix
the majority (it
On 02/03/2014 12:23 AM, infirit wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2014 18:56:01 +0100
infirit infi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 23:21:03 +1000
Peter Johansson troj...@gmail.com wrote:
[adding bug-automake]
On 02/02/14 12:25, infirit wrote:
So for a project we wanted to make the tarball
was
quite botched; I hope I've made better this time.
Regards,
Stefano
From e1469cc48cf976fd8c40359c9336eb7fe75e588c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:19:47 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Document surprising behaviour of AC_PROG_{CC,CXX,F77
At Tuesday 25 May 2010, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/25/2010 09:15 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
A nitpicking consistency patch.
* doc/autoconf.texi (Runtime) AC_RUN_IFELSE: Suggest to use
`./conftest$ac_exeext' rather than `./conftest$EXEEXT' to run
the compiled program
At Tuesday 01 June 2010, Ralf Wildenhues ralf.wildenh...@gmx.de
wrote:
I don't mind this patch, and it has been applied since, but I'll
note that we cannot reasonably expect $ac_objext and $ac_exeext to
be internal details, subject to change. The contents of
$ac_compile and $ac_link
At Friday 02 July 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
Thanks for the initial work. Since both of us are already named as
authors of the patch, I didn't see the need to repeat our names in
the changelog as the reporter. Then I fixed some wording and
condensed the example from 3 down to 2 @example
29c000465bf9ac10bb965570e9f732626c61208b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2010 22:41:03 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix minor copypaste leftover in m4sh tests.
* tests/m4sh.at (AS@t...@_tr_sh and AS@t...@_tr_cpp): Remove
useless variables assignements
e285d55b0d5338b268d41bd7600a832af5733f73 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:03:11 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Reimplement AS_BASENAME and AS_DIRNAME with shell functions.
* lib/m4sugar/m4sh.m4 (_AS_BASENAME_PREPARE): Define new shell
function `as_fn_basename
At Thursday 29 July 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
On 07/29/2010 05:15 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hello autoconfers.
There is any reason why the AS_BASENAME and AS_DIRNAME macros
don't have associated as_fn_* shells functions, like e.g.
AS_MKDIR_P or AS_UNSET do? If there is no such reason
Hi Eric.
At Friday 30 July 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
* doc/autoconf.texi (File Descriptors): Document issue with fd 10
and above.
Reported by Ralf Wildenhues.
---
ChangeLog |5 +
doc/autoconf.texi | 14 ++
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
* bin/autoreconf.in ($help): List `AUTOM4TE' among the honored
environment variables.
-*-*-
Regards,
Stefano
From 6f82b467442c418716d54bfd623c9c762a35fd66 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 02:01:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix
Looks ok to me if autoconf.texi is updated accordingly.
Done in the attached patch.
Regards,
Stefano
From 13abdf33f5baaae6a41f72367d5cde140fbca0bc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 02:01:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix autoreconf
Hi Eric. Just a little nitpicking...
On Monday 13 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
diff --git a/tests/tools.at b/tests/tools.at
index 167d68a..e4e119b 100644
--- a/tests/tools.at
+++ b/tests/tools.at
@@ -1164,8 +1164,9 @@ AT_SETUP([autom4te preselections])
# If this test should run on
On Monday 13 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
On 09/13/2010 10:20 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Eric. Just a little nitpicking...
On Monday 13 September 2010, Eric Blake wrote:
diff --git a/tests/tools.at b/tests/tools.at
index 167d68a..e4e119b 100644
--- a/tests/tools.at
+++ b
in doing that, BTW ;-).
Regards,
Stefano
From a7fe1b04360b92dd2eddf9a025791c468ead26f5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 20:19:00 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] tests: simplify grepping of 'automake --version'.
* tests/tools.at (autom4te
sections.
Suggestion by Stefano Lattarini.
diff --git a/doc/autoconf.texi b/doc/autoconf.texi
index eee4ba7..0e8c3cc 100644
--- a/doc/autoconf.texi
+++ b/doc/autoconf.texi
@@ -533,6 +533,8 @@ Portable Make Programming
* Parallel Make:: Parallel @command{make} quirks
@command{make} is invoked with @option{-j@var{N}}, it will reuse the
same shell for multiple commands within one recipe. This can have
unexpected consequences.@footnote{Note that GNU make has
--
1.7.2.3
From 3eaf9247e44a354cc0c0606e2c0f2b564e4c1c4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefano Lattarini
Hi Eric. Thanks for the quick review.
On Monday 24 January 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
[dropping automake-patches]
On 01/24/2011 03:38 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hello autoconfers and automakers.
In both FreeBSD and NetBSD make, when parallel mode is used (e.g., with
`make -j2
On Tuesday 25 January 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:38:28PM CET:
Subject: [PATCH] docs: another parallel make issue
* doc/autoconf.texi (Parallel Make): Document that some make
implementations, when run in parallel mode, connect stdout
On Tuesday 25 January 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:02:11AM CET:
So, what about the attached updated patch?
I have some nits, otherwise I'll let Eric approve this.
I agree with most of your nits, and I've amended the patch accordingly.
See
On Thursday 27 January 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 01/26/2011 01:21 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On Tuesday 25 January 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:02:11AM CET:
So, what about the attached updated patch?
I have some nits, otherwise
Hi Eric, and thanks for having solved this.
I have just a minor nit and a question below (sorry for not giving a
proper review, but I must admit some parts of your patch are way beyond
me ATM :-(, especially the new definition of AC_PACKAGE_TARNAME).
On Thursday 17 March 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
Hello Eric. Just a clarification, and my 2 cents...
On Thursday 17 March 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
We have an existing use case that argues for unexpanded (automake's
desire to write tests for dummy packages that use arbitrary names that
happen to match m4 builtins that aren't in the m4_
On Sunday 15 May 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hello autoconfers.
It seems that AC_PROG_LEX does not diagnose a failure to find the lex
library required to link lex-generated programs; on the contrary, when
all the link attempts (i.e., with `-ll' and `-lfl') fail, configure
uncorrectly
Hi Eric. I have some minor issues with this patch ...
On Tuesday 14 June 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
* doc/autoconf.texi (File Descriptors): Clarify that only the exec
builtin suffers from cloexec issues, and consolidate example to
show both /bin/sh and ksh pitfalls at once.
Signed-off-by:
Hi Eric.
On Tuesday 14 June 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
* doc/autoconf.texi (File Descriptors): Clarify that only the exec
builtin suffers from cloexec issues.
[SNIP PATCH]
The patch looks fine to me.
Thanks,
Stefano
On Thursday 04 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/04/2011 02:25 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
* doc/autoconf.texi (File Descriptors): Solaris 10 /bin/sh
optimizes away redirected `:' commands in a shell function
after the first call.
---
ChangeLog |7 +++
doc
+1,9 @@
+2011-08-08 Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
+
+ docs: fixed minor typos
+ * doc/autoconf.texi (Shell Functions): Fixed a couple of minor
+ typos.
+
2011-08-04 Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
docs: another Solaris sh bug
[dropping bug-automake, adding autoconf-patches]
References:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9245
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=159730
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Hi Eric.
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/16/2011 10:04
On Tuesday 16 August 2011, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
What is useful information today may become 'lore' in a few years so
it would be good to add additional data so that the reader (and
documentation maintainer) knows the vintage
On Thursday 18 August 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 08/18/2011 12:51 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
OK, given your considerations, I've updated my patch with the attached
squash-in. The amended patch is attached too. Let me know if it is
good to apply now.
I think it's good enough now; go
|9 +
doc/autoconf.texi | 37 +
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index 6e36455..9a03f19 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,12 @@
+2011-09-13 Stefano Lattarini
Hi Eric, thanks for the quick ACK.
On Tuesday 13 September 2011, Eric Blake wrote:
On 09/13/2011 07:57 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
* doc/autoconf.texi (Limitations of Builtins): Solaris 10 ksh
and XPG4 sh also fails upon `unset' of a variable that is not
set.
---
ChangeLog
a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog
index ab74303..e122686 100644
--- a/ChangeLog
+++ b/ChangeLog
@@ -1,6 +1,13 @@
2011-09-13 Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
docs: signal-related bugs and incompatibilities for the shells
+ Motivated by recent discussion on the bug-autoconf list
Hi Ralf.
On Wednesday 14 September 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hi Stefano,
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 03:15:04PM CEST:
* doc/autoconf.texi (Automatic Rule Rewriting): Solaris make
VPATH rewriting might apply also to shell variables, functions
and keywords
On Thursday 15 September 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:35:37AM CEST:
On Wednesday 14 September 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
It applies to any word that is surrounded by whitespace (or beginning or
end of command line), regardless
1 - 100 of 338 matches
Mail list logo
