BUSINESS ASSISTANCE.

INVESTMENT Reply only to this private email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ATTENTION: My proposal to you will be very surprising, as we have not had any Personal contact before. However, I sincerely seek your confidence in this Transaction, which I propose to you as a person of transparency, honesty and high

Re: aclocal 1.8 no longer loads overridden macros

"Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You might try a CVS version of GNU m4... from the ChangeLog: > > 2001-10-10 Gary V. Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > ~The trace semantics now attach the trace bit to a symbol name. > ~For as long as a traceon(`foo') is active, calls

Re: aclocal 1.8 no longer loads overridden macros

Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think we can't do anything about this in aclocal, apart from > documenting this new incompatibility. Since we are obviously > relying on --trace more and more, maybe we should prohibit all > macros that can affect the trace attribute. I agree.

Re: aclocal 1.8 no longer loads overridden macros

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andreas Schwab wrote: | Here is a testcase: | | $ cat configure.ac | AC_INIT([aclocal-test], [0]) | AC_PROG_CC | AC_OUTPUT | $ cat prog-cc.m4 | undefine([AC_PROG_CC]) | AC_DEFUN([AC_PROG_CC], [echo [AC_PROG_CC] dummy]) | $ aclocal -I . | $ cat aclocal.m

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

Greetings, On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Lars Hecking wrote: > > > > What about an automake option then to generate Makefiles for GNU make? > > How about a new binary 'automake' program that doesn't require an > external 'make' program at all? It would rea

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Lars Hecking wrote: > > What about an automake option then to generate Makefiles for GNU make? How about a new binary 'automake' program that doesn't require an external 'make' program at all? It would read the Makefile.am files directly ... Bob

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

%% Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: lh> What about an automake option then to generate Makefiles for GNU lh> make? You might get slightly more takers for an option to allow use of pattern rules, without specifically tying them to GNU make or relying on other _very_ GNU make-centric fe

HEAD test suite - 6 failures.

Are the following tests known to fail (on debian unstable): FAIL: ccnoco.test FAIL: gnits2.test FAIL: gnits3.test FAIL: pr300-lib.test FAIL: pr300-prog.test FAIL: python3.test Cheers, Rob -- GPG key available at: . signature.asc Description: This is a di

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

Paul D. Smith writes: > %% Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > bf> Per-subdirectory rules and definitions can be added in order to > bf> significantly reduce the amount of redundant code, and to > bf> re-enable the capability to usefully override parts of the default > bf> Make

non-recursive via includes

Ok, I plan to push this through a little closer to completion (some feedback from the maintainers would be greatly appreciated !) I've created a branch for this in arch: [EMAIL PROTECTED]/automake--nonrecursive--1.8 The arch repository is at http://people.initd.org/robertc/automake/ (G

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> "adl" == Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: adl> Couldn't we use the (existing) .java.o: inference rule in this adl> case? Actually, is there a difference between `%.o: %.java' and adl> `.java.o:' beside portability? --

Re: automake -vs- huge projects

>>> "Bob" == Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Bob> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: >> >>> "Bob" == Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Bob> Another thing that would help reduce Makefile size is to Bob> introduce synonyms for subdirectory paths. >> >>