Hello,
On 2014-11-11 22:07 +0200, fr33domlover wrote:
On 2014-11-11
Simon Richter simon.rich...@hogyros.de wrote:
On 11.11.2014 18:50, fr33domlover wrote:
When I ran `make distcheck`, it failed because the HTML files don't get
cleaned by `make distclean`. That makes sense, but
Using automake-1.13.4, when using the following Makefile.am fragment,
---8---
bin_PROGRAMS = foo
foo_SOURCES = foo.c bar.k
.k.${OBJEXT}:
gcc -x c -c $ -o $@
---8---
I observe that bar.o is not built and not linked into foo.
---8---
make V=0
CC foo.o
CCLD foo
On 2014-11-12 16:58 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Using automake-1.13.4, when using the following Makefile.am fragment,
---8---
bin_PROGRAMS = foo
foo_SOURCES = foo.c bar.k
.k.${OBJEXT}:
gcc -x c -c $ -o $@
---8---
I observe that bar.o is not built and not linked into foo.
On 2014-11-12
Nick Bowler nbow...@elliptictech.com wrote:
Hello,
On 2014-11-11 22:07 +0200, fr33domlover wrote:
On 2014-11-11
Simon Richter simon.rich...@hogyros.de wrote:
On 11.11.2014 18:50, fr33domlover wrote:
When I ran `make distcheck`, it failed because the HTML files
On 2014-11-12 21:58 +0200, fr33domlover wrote:
On 2014-11-12
Nick Bowler nbow...@elliptictech.com wrote:
What is probably happening is that in VPATH builds from your tarball,
your documentation is being rebuilt even though it was distributed.
This is leaving files behind in your build
On Wednesday 2014-11-12 20:15, Nick Bowler wrote:
On 2014-11-12 16:58 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Using automake-1.13.4, when using the following Makefile.am fragment,
.k.${OBJEXT}:
gcc -x c -c $ -o $@
I observe that bar.o is not built and not linked into foo.
Indeed, the use of
