Re: 'demo' not included in 2.2
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 11:40:58AM -0500, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Salut Sylvain, > > On 2 Mar 2008, at 09:24, Sylvain Beucler wrote: >> I downloaded 2.2 today and started reading the documentation. It >> makes reference to a 'demo' (aka GNU hell) directory which is present >> in 1.5.26 but missing in 2.2. Do you plan to include it there too? > > > The tests have moved to the tests/ directory in 2.2, so you can find > the demo tree at libtool-2.2/tests/demo. > > I'll take a look at the documentation later today and see if I can fix > it to avoid similar confusion for other users. Duh, I must have messed my 'find' command. Sorry for the false alarm :) -- Sylvain ___ Bug-libtool mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
Re: 'demo' not included in 2.2
Salut Sylvain, On 2 Mar 2008, at 09:24, Sylvain Beucler wrote: I downloaded 2.2 today and started reading the documentation. It makes reference to a 'demo' (aka GNU hell) directory which is present in 1.5.26 but missing in 2.2. Do you plan to include it there too? The tests have moved to the tests/ directory in 2.2, so you can find the demo tree at libtool-2.2/tests/demo. I'll take a look at the documentation later today and see if I can fix it to avoid similar confusion for other users. Cheers, Gary -- ())_. Email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ( '/ Read my blog: http://blog.azazil.net / )= ...and my book: http://sources.redhat.com/autobook `(_~)_ PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Bug-libtool mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
