On 02/03/2013 09:33 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13435
On 01/28/2013 02:55 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 01/23/2013 01:16 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I've pushed my attempt to the public rewindable branch
'experimental/djgpp
tags 13435 + moreinfo patch
thanks
On 03/05/2013 08:43 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
I won't hold you up. Since none of my folks thought it important
enough to take the time to test it, please just back-burner it. If
someone here needs the patch, they know where to find it.
OK. I just find it a
On 02/03/2013 09:33 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13435
On 01/28/2013 02:55 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 01/23/2013 01:16 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I've pushed my attempt to the public rewindable branch
'experimental/djgpp
On 02/23/2013 06:47 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/14/2013 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
OK, done. If there are no further objections, I will soon proceed to
re-write the experimental/preproc branch once again with the latest
version of these patches;
This has been done already
tags 13435 + moreinfo patch
thanks
On 03/05/2013 08:43 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
I won't hold you up. Since none of my folks thought it important
enough to take the time to test it, please just back-burner it. If
someone here needs the patch, they know where to find it.
OK. I just find it a
of the
remaining ones. Related minor simplifications and adjustments.
* lib/gen-perl-protos: Adjust.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
As usual, I'll push in 72 hours if there no reviews or objections by then.
automake.in | 224
Hi Pavel.
On 03/05/2013 02:56 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Dear Stefano, sorry for so late response,
On 12/30/2012 10:35 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 29/12/2012 21:43, Stefano Lattarini ha scritto:
On 12/29/2012 08:46 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 29/12/2012 17:32, Stefano Lattarini ha scritto
On 02/28/2013 08:59 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
[SNIP]
A second rewrite undoing (quotes here since the rewrite can't be
undone, and me and probably others as well will have to adjust the
local repo a second time) the first is probably the lesser evil,
even if it is another branch rewrite.
It
On 02/28/2013 09:12 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
So we should maybe go (after the next major release) with this naming
scheme for the branches?
* maint - for next micro version
* stable - for next minor version
* master - for next major
On 02/27/2013 02:25 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
You might have good points, and possibly even be completely right...
But I must ask, why didn't you step up during the lengthy discussion
about this change, nor objected during the delay (almost
On 02/27/2013 02:31 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
And while you *might* have changed my mind before (because you have
valid points, and maybe it would have better to err on the side of
safety), I have now already rewritten maint, so rather than
On 02/27/2013 10:28 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
[SNIP]
The long winding eyes glossing over discussion about version numbers
had nothing in it about branches, except the initial proposal which
stated:
* None of 'maint', 'master' and 'next' should be rewindable.
It also stated:
I
On 02/27/2013 02:07 PM, Nate Bargmann wrote:
[SNIP]
Not in this case, as 'master' had several commits lacking in 'maint'.
Would 'git cherry-pick' have worked?
No, because those commit were to be *dropped* (not added) from master;
the old 'master' containing them was to be renamed to
On 02/28/2013 12:00 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
[SNIP]
What I meant was that you can use (some of) my above proposed merges
to go forward with the new role for master instead of requiring help
from Savannah to allow rewriting master.
So... now are you ok with *completing* my branch renaming
Hi Peter.
On 02/26/2013 12:53 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-25 10:16, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Note that the users can avoid branch-rewriting issues by renaming their
'master' to 'next' and their 'maint' to 'master' before pulling. This
should probably be stated in a message (on list
On 02/25/2013 09:14 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-23 19:06, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/23/2013 06:46 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 04:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
In a couple of days, I will proceed with this branch moving:
* branch-1.13.2 - maint
* maint
On 02/23/2013 07:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
In a couple of days, I will proceed with this branch moving:
* branch-1.13.2 - maint
* maint - master
* master - next
Done.
Damn, not really. For some questionable reason, Savannah is rejecting
my non-fast-forward push to master
On 02/25/2013 09:14 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-23 19:06, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/23/2013 06:46 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 04:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
In a couple of days, I will proceed with this branch moving:
* branch-1.13.2 - maint
* maint
On 02/23/2013 07:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
In a couple of days, I will proceed with this branch moving:
* branch-1.13.2 - maint
* maint - master
* master - next
Done.
Damn, not really. For some questionable reason, Savannah is rejecting
my non-fast-forward push to master
On 02/25/2013 11:28 PM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
* maint - master
* master - next
Damn, not really. For some questionable reason, Savannah is rejecting
my non-fast-forward push to master even if I specify '--force', and
I cannot use
On 02/21/2013 04:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 03:32 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Not yet; we first need a preparatory patch adjusting NEWS and HACKING (as
well as few miscellaneous comments in tests and scripts). Then we can
finally proceed with the re-shuffling of the Git
On 02/14/2013 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
OK, done. If there are no further objections, I will soon proceed to
re-write the experimental/preproc branch once again with the latest
version of these patches;
This has been done already.
then we can think when and how to merge
On 02/21/2013 04:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 03:32 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Not yet; we first need a preparatory patch adjusting NEWS and HACKING (as
well as few miscellaneous comments in tests and scripts). Then we can
finally proceed with the re-shuffling of the Git
On 02/23/2013 06:46 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 04:06 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/21/2013 03:32 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Not yet; we first need a preparatory patch adjusting NEWS and HACKING (as
well as few miscellaneous comments in tests and scripts). Then we can
On 02/22/2013 07:11 PM, Olmide wrote:
I've solved the problem. It was not with autotools but with Microsoft's find
appearing in the PATH before the Cygwin find.
I suspected something of that kind. Thanks for letting us know,
Stefano
commit 10a1f8b1d17cf1602819fb93a758f3102e737d6e
Merge: 87b62c3 a5ed87e
Author: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Feb 21 18:12:27 2013 +0100
Merge branch 'master' into ng/master
* master:
maint: more adjustments to the new versioning scheme
aclocal: fix
On 02/17/2013 12:09 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
* automake.in: Here. And remove some redundant ones.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
I intend to push this in a couple of days (to maint) if there is no
objection.
Regards,
Stefano
automake.in
tags 13514 + patch
close 13514
stop
On 02/20/2013 10:11 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/18/2013 09:53 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano, thanks for refinements! I'm ok with these patches.
Good! I will push them tomorrow if I hear no objection by then.
Pushed now. I'm thus closing
commit a5ed87e7944deaea33914230e3d67ff08eb18382
Merge: 5e074aa b4dbcb7
Author: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Thu Feb 21 16:39:22 2013 +0100
Merge branch 'maint' into master
* maint:
maint: more adjustments to the new versioning scheme
aclocal: fix
On 02/20/2013 02:40 PM, Petr Hracek wrote:
Hi,
Hi Petr, sorry for the delay.
after reading of ustar format
(http://www.gnu.org/software/tar/manual/html_section/Formats.html)
I have made patch for m4/tar.m4 file against upstream:
In case that ustar format is used and uid or gid is bigger
On 02/17/2013 03:57 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/13/2013 07:39 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13578
OK, so far I've seen only positive feedback about this proposal. There
are still some unresolved issues about how to handle beta
On 02/21/2013 03:32 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Not yet; we first need a preparatory patch adjusting NEWS and HACKING (as
well as few miscellaneous comments in tests and scripts). Then we can
finally proceed with the re-shuffling of the Git repository -- which I
guess will also have
tags 13514 + patch
close 13514
stop
On 02/20/2013 10:11 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/18/2013 09:53 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano, thanks for refinements! I'm ok with these patches.
Good! I will push them tomorrow if I hear no objection by then.
Pushed now. I'm thus closing
* t/make-dryrun.tap: Here.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/make-dryrun.tap | 99 ++-
1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/make-dryrun.tap b/t/make-dryrun.tap
index 14d379a..4aa7146
On 02/18/2013 09:53 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano, thanks for refinements! I'm ok with these patches.
Good! I will push them tomorrow if I hear no objection by then.
[..]
See also:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2013-01/msg00115.html
experimenting might be enough to find a fix
Boris
Thanks,
Stefano
-*-*-*-
Stefano Lattarini (2):
tests: refactor/enhance tests about make dry-run mode
coverage: expose automake bug#13760
t/make-dryrun.tap | 123 --
1 file changed, 72
* t/make-dryrun.tap: Here.
* THANKS: Update with the name of the bug reporter.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/make-dryrun.tap | 28 +++-
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/make-dryrun.tap b/t/make-dryrun.tap
On 02/20/2013 02:07 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13760
[SNIP]
I have only a patchy knowledge too, but combining that with some
experimenting might be enough to find a fix
ESENTTOOEARLY, sorry. Here is the complete paragraph I
On 02/18/2013 09:53 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano, thanks for refinements! I'm ok with these patches.
Good! I will push them tomorrow if I hear no objection by then.
[..]
See also:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2013-01/msg00115.html
tags 13748 + notabug
close 13748
stop
On 02/18/2013 08:19 AM, Andrew Brager wrote:
Numerous failures/errors. I don't know if this is normal. See below.
[SNIP]
PACKAGE='iksemel'
This package has nothing to do with Automake. You'll have to report
the failure to the developers if the
On 02/19/2013 02:39 PM, Simon Richter wrote:
Hi,
I have a library that, among other things, has a number of functions
related to event handling with timeouts. In order to get reliable
results, I have to use long timeouts, which add up in the total test
time. Is there a way to have tests run
severity 13761 minor
tags 13761 moreinfo
stop
Hi Daniel, thanks for the report.
On 02/19/2013 03:39 PM, Daniel Macks wrote:
Building automake on OS X 10.6 with autoconf-2.69 installed,
I get a self-test failure:
FAIL: t/objc-megademo.sh
It passes on 10.7.
This is good news; it suggests
tags 13588 + patch
tags 8343 + patch
merge 13588 8343
thanks
Merging with bug#8343, since it's the same issue
Regards,
Stefano
On 02/07/2013 11:01 AM, Marco Maggi wrote:
Ciao,
Ciao Marco, sorry for the delay.
this is somewhat a silly request... :-) I am a new user of
the parallel test harness; I have a project with a set of
tests that I want to run under different implementations of
the same language; I put
On 02/13/2013 07:39 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Reference:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13578
OK, so far I've seen only positive feedback about this proposal. There
are still some unresolved issues about how to handle beta releases; but
the related proposals can be seen
: Likewise.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
aclocal.in | 10 ++
t/aclocal-macrodir.tap | 22 +-
t/aclocal-macrodirs.tap | 22 +-
3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/aclocal.in b
/aclocal-macrodirs.tap: Likewise.
* THANKS: Update.
* NEWS: Likewise.
Suggested-by: Ben Pfaff b...@cs.stanford.edu
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
NEWS| 7 +++
THANKS | 1 +
aclocal.in | 46
On 02/11/2013 01:11 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi, thanks for your comments!
Here is second iteration of my proposal.
[SNIP]
And here is my re-roll, as promised. Among the changes:
- tweaks to comments and commit messages;
- style fixes to the code, and more sanity checks;
- dropped
: Likewise.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
aclocal.in | 10 ++
t/aclocal-macrodir.tap | 22 +-
t/aclocal-macrodirs.tap | 22 +-
3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/aclocal.in b
/aclocal-macrodirs.tap: Likewise.
* THANKS: Update.
* NEWS: Likewise.
Suggested-by: Ben Pfaff b...@cs.stanford.edu
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
NEWS| 7 +++
THANKS | 1 +
aclocal.in | 46
On 02/14/2013 01:43 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I will push this series to maint in a couple of days if there is no
objection. Reviews are welcome.
Regards,
Stefano
Stefano Lattarini (4):
refactor: rip module Automake::Language out of automake script
build: auto-generate perl
* automake.in: Here. And remove some redundant ones.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
I intend to push this in a couple of days (to maint) if there is no objection.
Regards,
Stefano
automake.in | 107
Hi Pavel.
There are still some issues with your patches (most of them reported
below). No need for your to re-roll; I will fix them locally, and then
send the amended patches out for further review before pushing. Not
sure whether I can do that today though, so be patient.
On 02/11/2013 01:11
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/ax/test-lib.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/ax/test-lib.sh b/t/ax/test-lib.sh
index 81f9170..a3c16ee 100644
--- a/t/ax/test-lib.sh
+++ b/t/ax/test-lib.sh
@@ -258,7 +258,7
commit 73e9f71c130dd620350553752d63edb761336e0e
Merge: b9384c4 f637fc3
Author: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Fri Feb 15 15:39:02 2013 +0100
Merge branch 'maint'
* maint:
typofix: in comments in 't/ax/test-lib.sh'
tests on TAP: don't run the driver
commit f637fc39a65cac7eb7050359e6c352a235f64528
Merge: 0756a43 24dbfd9
Author: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Date: Fri Feb 15 15:06:19 2013 +0100
Merge branch 'branch-1.13.2' into maint
* branch-1.13.2:
typofix: in comments in 't/ax/test-lib.sh'
tests on TAP
On 02/08/2013 01:31 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/08/2013 10:11 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote:
Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more
control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending
On 02/14/2013 01:20 PM, Bert Wesarg wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS
index 6dcce72..e27e0cf 100644
--- a/NEWS
+++ b/NEWS
@@ -100,6 +100,18 @@ New in 1.13.2:
be longer necessary, so we deprecate it with runtime warnings
On 02/14/2013 03:53 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
From: Peter Rosin p...@lysator.liu.se
The rationale for this change is that it is annoying to have
to repeat the directory name when including a Makefile fragment.
For deep directory structures
On 02/08/2013 01:31 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/08/2013 10:11 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote:
Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more
control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending
-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Peter Rosin p...@lysator.liu.se
---
NEWS| 12 +
automake.in | 26 ---
doc/automake.texi | 20
t/list-of-tests.mk | 1 +
t/preproc-reldir.sh | 129
, t/preproc-c-compile.sh: ... into these two
tests, with some refactorings, clean-up and enhancements.
* t/list-of-tests.mk: Adjust.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/list-of-tests.mk| 5 +-
t/preproc-basics.sh
* t/ax/am-test-lib.sh: Here.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/ax/am-test-lib.sh | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/t/ax/am-test-lib.sh b/t/ax/am-test-lib.sh
index f3fcacc..8508197 100644
--- a/t/ax/am-test-lib.sh
+++ b/t/ax/am-test-lib.sh
something blatantly wrong even if our tools correct the dumb mistake
for us. So fix the TEST_LOG_DRIVER definition.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
t/ax/tap-setup.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/t/ax/tap-setup.sh b/t/ax/tap
On 02/14/2013 01:20 PM, Bert Wesarg wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
diff --git a/NEWS b/NEWS
index 6dcce72..e27e0cf 100644
--- a/NEWS
+++ b/NEWS
@@ -100,6 +100,18 @@ New in 1.13.2:
be longer necessary, so we deprecate it with runtime warnings
This is just a preparatory patch in view of future changes.
* lib/Automake/Language.pm: New module, ripped out from ...
* automake.in: ... here. Related adjustments.
* Makefile.am (dist_perllib_DATA): List the new module.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
Makefile.am | 13 +
aclocal.in | 22 +-
automake.in | 18 +-
bootstrap.sh| 11 ++-
lib/gen-perl-protos | 36
form, avoiding ''.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
automake.in | 90
lib/Automake/Language.pm | 2 +-
2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
diff --git a/automake.in b/automake.in
index
We can do so now that our build rules auto-generate a list of
prototypes for all functions ins our scripts.
* automake.in: Adjust throughout.
* HACKING: Adjust advises.
Signed-off-by: Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com
---
HACKING | 5 +-
automake.in | 552
I will push this series to maint in a couple of days if there is no
objection. Reviews are welcome.
Regards,
Stefano
Stefano Lattarini (4):
refactor: rip module Automake::Language out of automake script
build: auto-generate perl subroutines prototypes for automake and aclocal
maint: use
On 02/14/2013 03:53 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
From: Peter Rosin p...@lysator.liu.se
The rationale for this change is that it is annoying to have
to repeat the directory name when including a Makefile fragment.
For deep directory structures
On 02/14/2013 08:10 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
A substantial blocker for converting large packages to non-recursive
builds will be eliminated. Considerable time and electricity will
be saved.
By chance, do you plan to start using the feature
Hi Diego.
On 02/12/2013 06:50 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 12/02/2013 17:44, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Ah, ok, so in the end you already agree that this is a documentation
issue rather than a versioning one. Please correct me if I'm wrong!
I guess it's a matter of perception.
I
Hi Miles.
On 02/12/2013 12:50 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14? Today,
we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with the scheme
you are proposing?
There's
Hi Miles.
On 02/12/2013 12:50 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com writes:
But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14? Today,
we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with the scheme
you are proposing?
There's
On 02/12/2013 07:28 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
Hey
I'm porting a lib to a non recursive make build system. I have a
single top level Makefile.am which has:
AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = subdir-objects
include src/lib/css/Makefile.mk
In that Makefile.mk, yacc is called and generates the file
On 02/11/2013 04:00 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 11/02/2013 15:54, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14? Today,
we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with the scheme
you are proposing?
Given that 1.12.0
On 02/12/2013 09:25 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
2013/2/12 Stefano Lattarini stefano.lattar...@gmail.com:
But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14? Today,
we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with the scheme
you are proposing?
There's always
On 02/12/2013 03:27 PM, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:24 AM, Stefano Lattarini
stefano.lattar...@gmail.com wrote:
On 02/12/2013 07:28 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
Hey
I'm porting a lib to a non recursive make build system. I have a
single top level Makefile.am which has
On 02/12/2013 04:15 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 12/02/2013 09:26, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Given that 1.12.0 was not really final release,
Why not?
AM_PROG_MKDIR_P.
Ah, right. I had forgot about that (selective memory? A dangerous
thing).
This is true, but is only due to the fact
On 02/11/2013 01:11 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi, thanks for your comments!
Thanks for your patches, and you patience.
Here is second iteration of my proposal.
[PATCH 1/2] aclocal: just warn if the primary local m4 dir doesn't
aclocal.in | 10 ++
t/aclocal-macrodir.tap
Hi Diego, Jack, sorry for the late reply.
On 02/01/2013 06:47 AM, Jack Kelly wrote:
Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu writes:
On 31/01/2013 20:58, Jack Kelly wrote:
IMHO, that seems like a great way to cause trouble for unsuspecting
users. (Anyone remember KDE4.0?) Can you expand on
[+cc automake-patches]
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2013-02/msg00041.html
Related ticket:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13514
On 02/08/2013 01:56 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano,
Hi Pavel, and thanks for the patches. Your work is really
[+cc automake-patches]
Reference:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2013-02/msg00041.html
Related ticket:
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13514
On 02/08/2013 01:56 PM, Pavel Raiskup wrote:
Hi Stefano,
Hi Pavel, and thanks for the patches. Your work is really
On 02/08/2013 01:40 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 08/02/2013 13:26, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
But maintainer-mode won't help you here; it will just cause make to ignore
some remake rules that require maintainer tools, so you are *more* likely
to end up with a subtly and silently broken
On 02/08/2013 05:13 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
Hmm, if that's the case, then I think canon is the wrong term to
use, as it typically implies that the result is still in the same
domain as the input.
Suggestions for a better name then?
Dunno... something like RELDIR_SYM would make sense ...
On 02/08/2013 10:11 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote:
Stefano Lattarini wrote:
Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more
control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to
the agreed form ;-) -- which if I'm
On 02/08/2013 12:37 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 07/02/2013 19:47, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
So you want to allow users to disable maintainer-mode rules in every
package?
Yes. Where users here is distribution packagers.
Better risk an extra rebuild than to miss a required one IMVHO
On 02/05/2013 02:01 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
%...% seems nice to me.
I'm fine to settle for that (see my reply to last mail from Peter for
more details).
Incidentally, given the name, I assume the name reldir always refers
to a relative path? What is it relative to again?
The path of the
Hi Diego.
On 02/07/2013 01:09 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 03/02/2013 20:28, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
And note that support for INCLUDES has not been re-introduced in the
master branch yet, at the moment of writing; but we plan to definitely
do so before the next major release
On 02/05/2013 12:03 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-04 19:11, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/04/2013 06:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
So they aren't quite affected by configure, but they are dependent on
relative location, just like existing substitutions like @top_srcdir@
are dependent
On 02/05/2013 02:01 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
%...% seems nice to me.
I'm fine to settle for that (see my reply to last mail from Peter for
more details).
Incidentally, given the name, I assume the name reldir always refers
to a relative path? What is it relative to again?
The path of the
On 02/07/2013 10:52 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
... and canon_reldir means the same thing, except canonicalized?
Yes, canonicalized in a sense quite specific to Automake:
http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/automake.html#Canonicalization
So, for example, if %reldir% expands to
Hi Diego.
On 02/07/2013 01:09 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 03/02/2013 20:28, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
And note that support for INCLUDES has not been re-introduced in the
master branch yet, at the moment of writing; but we plan to definitely
do so before the next major release
On 02/05/2013 12:22 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
On 02/04/2013 11:31 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/04/2013 01:16 AM, Luke Mewburn wrote:
[CUT]
Especially when the time between previous major releases was 2.5 years.
Examining the Changelog and release dates:
[Aside: note
On 02/07/2013 03:06 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
While working on my guide, I've noticed that there is an inconsistency
with the way boolean parameters are passed.
AM_MAINTAINER_MODE expects [enable] to be on-by-default.
(Side note: using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE these days is generally a bad
On 02/07/2013 06:17 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
On 07/02/2013 16:18, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
(Side note: using AM_MAINTAINER_MODE these days is generally a bad idea
IMHO; we should find a way to deprecate its usage in documentation, and
eventually start warning at runtime if it is used
On 02/04/2013 12:10 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch
'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon
send them to the list to simplify review (I will drop the
bug tracker from CC
On 02/04/2013 10:35 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-04 00:10, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch
'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon
send them to the list to simplify review (I
On 02/04/2013 03:06 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
On 2013-02-04 14:43, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On 02/04/2013 01:04 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
I {{think}} this one will be the easiest on us all.
I tend to agree (but see Peter Johansson's proposal to use
{AM_RELDIR} instead; what do you think about
601 - 700 of 5090 matches
Mail list logo
