Enrico Weigelt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'd like to invite you to this project.
how do you handle cycles in the tree?
how do you handle multiple roots?
how do you handle transient relations?
thi
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If you have any advice or ways to streamline the process I would very
much like to hear it.
spend one hour a week as a group reading change logs (and only change
logs -- no code!) for the week preceding. discuss applicability of
changes, especially whether or not the
From: Ronald Landheer-Cieslak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:52:25 +0200 (CEST)
That is actually a very good idea!
that's why they pay me the big bux (oh wait... ;-)
thi
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:57:26 -0700
This overhead will take work and commitment from people. How much
improvement can this deliver?? 10%? 50%? 500%?
the way to look at it is that you WANT work and commitment from people,
but you want the right kind of work a
greetings libtool and automake folks,
is there any way to tell libtool/automake NOT to install .la and .a
files? i would like to install only the shared object libraries as
"plugin modules" (the main program knows of the plugin modules location
and can dlopen them directly w/o search; there is no
argh! it figures, the answer is actually in autoconf:
AC_DISABLE_STATIC
AM_PROG_LIBTOOL
sorry for the noise.
thi
Ireneusz SZCZESNIAK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
But I only want "make" to ignore errors from running tests, not all
errors. My test scripts are automatically generated by "make" and
then run. If "make" fails to generate such a script, then I want
"make" to report the error and stop.
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:07:17 -0600 (MDT)
From: Ireneusz SZCZESNIAK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Yeah! But still I want the output of "make check" to be clean. When
a test fails, then I expect to see: "FAIL: test.sh".
in this case the only thing i can suggest is to post-process the
Makefil
Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
So, should automake -i make sure the directory exists and create it if
needed? Or that would be considered unsafe (a typo in the name, et
voil=E0, a nasty dir pollutes your codeshore).
perhaps only if --force is also specified, else signal error
i see from the previous post that you use a "manual VPATH" methodology.
there are two approaches you can try:
1/ undo the unorthodoxy (move auto* files to top-level dir)
2/ prefix relative paths (such as "../../") w/ $(srcdir)
probably 1/ is the best for minimizing gray hairs long term, although
"Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If you're willing to require GNU make then I'm quite confidant you
could write automake as nothing more than a suite of GNU make macros
and functions.
I doubt there would be any need for code changes to GNU make at all.
i think it would be
Kelley Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sorry if this is a RTFM, but I can't find it.
The release notes for automake 1.8, mention that it changes the
defaults to go back to building the .info files in the source
directory since that is the GNU coding standards.
What do I have to p
i posted the following to the autoconf list:
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf/2004-04/msg00131.html
but perusing the archive shows that list is mostly full of (other)
junk, hence this post, in case autoconf maintainers have decided
to avoid that list.
thi
From: Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 09:31:43 -0500 (CDT)
Autoconf 1.12 is an anchient legacy version dating from eight years
ago. The current Autoconf is 2.59. If no one responded, it was
probably because your request was similar to proposing a design
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Maintenance should really include upgrading to the current
version of autoconf.
that's probably something a maintainer decides, hopefully w/
some input from the users.
Is there any VMS support in the older
version that is missing in the current
"Jay West" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'll host it in exchange for someone taking 60 seconds to answer my
previous post ;)
probably if you host such a wiki, your questions (or related ones) will
receive wider review and potentially useful answers will show up sooner.
thi
Irek Szczesniak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a way of achieving my goal?
i believe this can be handled completely by autoconf,
w/o involving automake. try placing in configure.ac:
AC_CONFIG_FILES([fsclient.sh],[chmod +x fsclient.sh])
AC_OUTPUT
tested w/ GNU Autoconf 2.59.
thi
Fred Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> How can one get AC_DEFINE to define a variable with an argument
> list? I want to do something like this:
>
> AC_DEFINE(incr(x),((x)+1),"increment")
i think either you misunderstand AC_DEFINE or i misunderstand you.
where in the documentation is the po
Ed Hartnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Howdy all!
>
> If I have some tests, and want to run them with command line options,
> how do I do it?
>
> For example, I have to have a shell script to run tst_parallel below,
> because it needs to be called with the poe command, and some env vars
> set
be explained in HACKING.
to publicize the new versioning scheme
- ??? (suggestions welcome)
Maybe cut a release that changes only the version number? Personally i
would find that to be not particularly useful, but others might welcome
the explicitness.
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
utomake-NG) from the
throng of candidates (one hopes), and then, after a suitable ramp-up
period, let the new maintainer decide the fate of the code.
[cc -> to, trimmed]
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen . GPG key: 4C807502
. NB: ttn at glug dot
://www.gnuvola.org/u/2013/01/24h09.html>.
The point is: For timely resolution, you need to take direct action.
Let RCS's (ever-growing) lacuna serve as a warning!
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen . GPG key: 4C807502
.
his
approach yet, having just learned about it, prompted by your query (so
thanks for asking!), however. Does it work?
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
pgp2gxOjWJRrL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
r) between a static and shared-lib build. That
sounds weird to me. What am i missing?
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lisp: (responsep (questions 'technical)
(not (via 'mailing-list)))
sual "make install" flow via:
install-data-local:
$(MAKE) install-data-am intreelib=
This would mimic the -data side of "make install" (i think).
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lis
robust solution that can DTRT noninteractively.
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lisp: (responsep (questions 'technical)
(not (via 'mailing-list)))
=> nil
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
aemon
isn't running; the exit 77 if the daemon isn't running to skip
that stop group.
[details]
Thanks for describing this Autotest setup. I will experiment.
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lisp: (responsep (
precise, all this should happen before calling autoreconf.
If you can maintain this phase separation, life is easier.
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen
GPG key: 4C807502
(if you're human and you know it)
read my lisp: (responsep (questions 'technical)
ay to do this?
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen ---
(defun responsep (query) ; (2020) Software Libero
(pcase (context query) ; = Dissenso Etico
(`(technical ,ml) (correctp ml))
...))
be different then
this is a bit trickier (call touch in a loop until the
timestamp changes).
Thanks. I didn't think/know about the (potential) truncation.
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen ---
(defun responsep (query) ; (2020) Software
ChangeLog entry:
* doc/automake.texi (Dependency Tracking Evolution): Fix typo.
--- automake.texi 17 Apr 2006 12:14:07 - 1.134
+++ automake.texi 26 Apr 2006 03:03:41 -
@@ -10420,7 +10420,7 @@
@item @command{makedepend}
This was a commonly-used method in the past
some of my autogen.sh (bootstrap script) files use the construct:
amprefix=`automake --help | sed '/^Usage:/!d;s/Usage: //;s,/bin/automake.*,,'`
amlibdir=`ls -d ${amprefix}/share/automake-* | tail -1`
for f in install-sh INSTALL COPYING ; do
ln -sf ${amlibdir}/$f
done
this is not r
() Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
() Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:58:11 +0200
You mean, other than `automake --add-missing' (or, short: -a)?
not really.
Or is it that you'd need something like
automake --add-missing --install-even-if-i-do-not-use-automake
yes. (for some projects i don
() Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
() Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:48:16 +0200
AM_CFLAGS is reserved for developers. It's not a problem
if the user overrides the default value of CFLAGS since
CFLAGS is reserved for the user.
i understand, and am actually trying achieve, this. my point
is tha
() Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
() Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:12:28 +0200
OK look, here is how it goes AFAIK:
- You want to set project-wide flags, use AM_CFLAGS
- Your user wants to set project-wide flags, it does: ./configure
CFLAGS=...
- If your user didn't set project-wide flag
() Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
() Tue, 12 Feb 2008 13:36:29 +0100
Please, do not propagate ugly solutions, unless you
know that a clean one does not exist.
It's hard to know if a clean one does not exist; i
don't maintain these tools and don't generally dig
into them more deeply tha
ode=install
#
# Copyright (C) 2007 Thien-Thi Nguyen
#
# This file is part of ttn-do, released under the terms of the
# GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software
# Foundation; either version 3, or (at your option) any later
# version. There is NO WARRANTY. See file COPYING
What do people do to make experimentation w/ GCC warnings easy?
In Guile-PG's configure.in, there is:
|## If we're using GCC, ask for aggressive warnings.
|if test x"$GCC" = xyes ; then
| AGGRESSIVE_WARNINGS="-std=gnu99 -pedantic"
| for x in all extra float-equal declaration-after-statement \
|
() "samson.pierre"
() Sun, 15 Aug 2010 03:09:50 +0200 (CEST)
> > %.bmp: %.xcf
> > $(GIMP) -i -b '(xcf-bmp "$<" "$@")' -b '(gimp-quit 0)'
Is there an equivalent or anything else which can help me to write this
rule avoiding this warning message?
I think here you can use something lik
>From 7b70f8b27057c5b9a0f621dcfd5064c5d90947dd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thien-Thi Nguyen
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 02:14:56 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Document a common conversion for GNU make pattern rules.
* doc/automake.texi (Multiple Outputs): Expand on GNU make
pattern rules; explain how to con
From: Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2002 21:47:43 -0800
manual dependencies [...]
^^
probably find a lot of these in docs/Makefile.am (yuk yuk ;-).
thi
hi automake folks,
in the version of guile i'm munging, i decided to generate texinfo from
scanned source snippets, i.e.:
.scm -> .doc -> .doc-index -> .texi
.c -> .doc (or .cdoc) -> .doc-index -> .texi
this is not a simple concatenation, however. .texi is actually made
from .twerp ("texi
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
It would be nice to let other tools that generate dependencies well
integrate into automake seamlessly.
presumably "well" means "following depcomp protocol", i.e., the transformer
for foo.a to foo.b needs to by side effect create .deps/foo.Pb, in whic
hi automake folks,
i would like to have
SUBDIRS = a b c D
but control recursion into D via a configure.in "enable_D" var. any hint
would be appreciated. if there's a recommended way, i'll write it up and
submit a doc patch.
the docs (autoconf/automake) don't mention "conditional subdirs" l
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amusingly this topic was discussed here last week, and we updated the
manual while we were at it. Here is the resulting section of the
manual (this text will go into Automake 1.7, but it applies to 1.6.x
as well). Fell free to suggest
Waldemar Rosenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Is there another way to solve this kind of problem?
well, it's not clean, but you can process the headers on install. this could
be a provisional approach (i.e., kludge) while you make the interface platform
independent.
see below for petrify-h
Thien-Thi Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes (imprecisely):
you can process the headers on install.
sorry, i forgot to emphasize: the headers processed are those other than
config.h -- the horrible approach described does not require you to install
config.h. (did i mention that this ap
Bruce Korb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
http://ac-archive.sf.net/Miscellaneous/ac_create_prefix_config_h.html
thanks for the tip. fwiw, to try this i had to substitute
AC_ECHO_MKFILE(foo,bar)
with
echo 'foo' > bar
(the AC_ECHO_MKFILE from the website is empty.)
thi
greetings,
can someone suggest a way to regen stamp-vti based on changes to a
file besides configure.ac?
i see this in am/vers-texi.am:
## Depend on %CONFIGURE-AC% so that version number updates cause a
## rebuild.
$(srcdir)/stamp-%VTI%: %TEXI% $(top_srcdir)/%CONFIGURE-AC%
this is fine i
sounds about right -- finding the appropriate mux point to pinch is indeed the
first step towards sanity. if you get funding, give me a buzz. otherwise, i
will continue to work w/ (old) librx and approach the problem from the guile
perspective. (e.g., below is lex.test w/ a simple shell-lexer sp
From: Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 10:51:51 -0700
You think the world is ready for Guile?
guile is not ready for the world. current install practice spews .la
and .so files all over $libdir and uses an internal "bugfixed" copy of
libltdl (if my reading of the cvs
51 matches
Mail list logo
