Downloaded the latest automake from CVS. Running "make" went fine. Ran
"make check" and got five errors:
ansi3.test
install2.test
pr87.test
subobj3.test
target-cfalgs.test
New to automake so I cannot point out the exact problem. Willing to assist
any way I can.
Stephen
On 20 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I personally observe no failure. Please, post the result of
make check TESTS='ansi3.test install2.test pr87.test subobj3.test
target-cfalgs.test' VERBOSE=yes
Here is the result: (long
On 20 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
Huh??? What version of autoconf are you using? Could you try this?
autoconf 2.94d
src/am/tests % make check TESTS=ansi3.test nostromo 15:45
---
Output of make check TESTS=ansi3.test VERBOSE=yes
On 20 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 20 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
Huh??? What version of autoconf are you using? Could you try this?
autoconf 2.94d
You missed the second part of my request methinks, with the grep.
Update your cvs
Problem with install2.test
Here is the output from "make check TESTS='install2.test' VERBOSE=yes
---
Making check in .
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/automake'
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check-am'.
make[1]: Leaving directory
No problem. I will move the code into a user directory and work as my
normal user. In regards to install the "questionable" tarball, how do you
handle it? If my /usr/local/bin is owned by root then I cannot install it
as a normal user.
Stephen
On 20 Feb 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
Running automake (CVS compiled) against my configure.in causes the
message "automake: configure.in: required file `master/depcomp' not found.
There is no mention to a file called "depcomp" in configure.in or
master/Makefile.am. In the master/Makefile.in there is mention to it:
depcomp = $(SHELL)
/nestROB/nestORB-0.51/=build/src
Is there something that I am doing wrong here? I do not want to declare
a bug if I am improperly using automake.
Stephen Torri
On Fri, 2002-07-12 at 11:38, Tom Tromey wrote:
Stephen == Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephen I have my LDFLAGS variable set for a program as:
Stephen -L@top_srcdir@/src -lnestORB
Use -L$(top_builddir)/src instead.
top_srcdir points to the source tree, not the build tree
I am just posting this to make sure I understand the difference between
these:
AM_CFLAGS - compile time flags
AM_CPPFLAGS - preprocessor flags (e.g. -I, -D)
AM_LDFLAGS - linker flags (e.g. -L)
I am working on a project that is updating its Makefile.am files. I see
a variety of flags in one
On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 23:11, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 10:33:40PM -0500, Stephen Torri wrote:
I am just posting this to make sure I understand the difference between
these:
AM_CFLAGS - compile time flags
AM_CPPFLAGS - preprocessor flags (e.g. -I, -D)
AM_LDFLAGS
On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 01:06, Paul Smith wrote:
Steve gave you the advantage: so you can run them individually.
There are many compilers that won't accept linker flags (libraries,
etc.) on a command line meant to compile a file (but not link it).
The reason for having a separate CFLAGS
Automake-2.54
Automake-1.6.3
When I can configure and compile a project that I am working on the
automake and autoconf files. When I run make -j4 it works fine. But
when I try to do make distcheck I get back:
config.status: creating po/POTFILES
config.status: creating po/Makefile
config.status:
On Mon, 2002-09-30 at 22:59, Tom Tromey wrote:
`distcheck' will unpack your new tarball and try to configure and
build it. Look in the unpacked directory. Is the `m4' subdirectory
there?
Yes.
If not, did you perhaps forget `SUBDIRS = m4'?
No. Its the second item in the list.
That's
In part of a project we generate code from an IDL compiler. All we want
to do is ensure that the files compile but we do not want to link
everything together to create an executable. Is it possible to stop
automake from invoking the linker for just one directory?
Stephen
On Mon, 2002-10-07 at 21:11, Tom Tromey wrote:
Stephen == Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephen In part of a project we generate code from an IDL
Stephen compiler. All we want to do is ensure that the files compile
Stephen but we do not want to link everything together to create
than a full make job. Directory 'Z' might only depend
on a few libraries in 'A', 'G' and 'R'. Four directories is nicer than
24 from a developers point of view.
I hope this explains what I am looking at for a solution.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description
dependencies on other parts then make sure
they're satisfiable via the generated makefile.
Earnie.
How would you make sure that dependencies on other parts are satisified?
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 10:20, Bruce Korb wrote:
Stephen Torri wrote:
On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 08:23, Earnie Boyd wrote:
As long as the sub-project didn't have dependencies on the other parts,
your sound developer should be able to configure, cd Z and make. You
could even create
the libraries are installed now to /usr/local/lib. So I
would want to do /usr/local/lib/PACKAGE_NAME/MODULE_TYPE. I hope that is
clear enough since I am writing this email being very tired.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description
this problem.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
.
Thanks for the ideas Tom. I got want I wanted in the end. You helped me
remember the -avoid-version flag.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
libFS.so in the install directory is to place a script
in the Makefile.am to remove the libFS.la. Is this the correct method?
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
{--disable-shared},
! or if the host does not support shared libraries.
See the previous remark. Again it seems counter productive.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
semantics to get
the job doing. I am curious to hear opinions on this?
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
On Mon, 2003-10-13 at 18:56, Tom Tromey wrote:
Stephen == Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Stephen TESTS = test_Foo
Stephen test_Foo_SOURCES = test_Foo.cpp
As you discovered, you have to list test_Foo in a _PROGRAMS variable.
I suggest check_PROGRAMS, as this is what `check
I am looking for an example Makefile.am for installing python scripts.
The files I need to install are composed of module files and the main
executable as I call it.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally
)/sage.in sage.tmp
chmod +x sage.tmp
mv sage.tmp sage
CLEANFILES = sage
--
Stephen Torri
GPG Key: http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~storri/storri.asc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
your favorite hello
world code. Use automake and autoconf to build the program by creating a
simple Makefile.am and a configure.in.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
chosen and generate the end result file WarpedConfig.h in src/warped
directory.
I hope this helps.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
that looks like (?) and let autoheader generate the .in file? If you
have a quick pointer to where this is documented I would appreciate it.
info autoheader
Also look at Configuration Header Files section of 'info autoconf'.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AH_VERBATIM is the macro you want to use
for your header. Can you just post the WarpedConfig.h.in file? It would
be nice to see what is causing all the trouble.
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When make installs a library via make install it gets place in the
correct location as a .so file. Yet when make uninstall is run it fails
to remove the .so file. The reason for the failure is that its looking
for the .la file and not the .so.
(Gentoo system)
libtool: 1.4.3-r4
automake: 1.8.3
On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 10:09, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
This sounds like a bug in your old libtool. Your Automake is out of
date as well.
Bob
The highest libtool that is available via the Gentoo portage system is
1.5.6. I will upgrade to that.
How is 1.8.3 an out of date automake as well?
I have upgraded to automake-1.8.3 and libtool-1.5.6 and still I am
running into trouble on my Gentoo box to get a library file to be
removed when I do make uninstall.
bash-2.05b$ sudo make uninstall
/bin/sh ../../../libtool-nofpic --mode=uninstall rm -f
Autoconf 2.59 doesn't work with automake 1.9 for some reason. I made
conftest.ac with only AC_INIT in it and ran autoconf manually it
completed fine with no errors. I did:
autoconf -o /dev/null conftest.ac
--
Results of doing ./configure:
checking whether
On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 17:17, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, Stephen torri wrote:
Autoconf 2.59 doesn't work with automake 1.9 for some reason. I made
conftest.ac with only AC_INIT in it and ran autoconf manually it
completed fine with no errors. I did:
I saw this problem
On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 16:03, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
Stephen == Stephen torri [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Stephen bash-2.05b$ autoconf --version
Stephen autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.59
Stephen Written by David J. MacKenzie and Akim Demaille.
The config.log you sent shows
In a project which I particpate with there are certain compiler flags
that need to be removed from the CFLAGS because they cause problems with
the compiled code.
For example if with a imaginary compiler I had the flags:
CFLAGS=-a -b -c d
For a large part of the project the CFLAGS are fine but a
In the same place you subscribed to this list.
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/automake
Stephen
--
Stephen Torri [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 2004-12-24 at 22:03 -0500, Bill wrote:
I'm at my wit's end. I've been banging my head against the wall with
autotools for several months now, and with each turn I seem to meet trouble.
Please see the attached tar.gz file. It contains my minimal testcase for
the problem I'm having
41 matches
Mail list logo
