> I don't remember if this breaks anything. It probably doesn't,
> though. Can you write a patch? Or, if not, could you submit a PR?
I think it's enough to move the test for EXTRA to after the bit that
adds $(EXEEXT), per below. It does the right thing for me on some
gnu-ish makefiles.
* automake.in (am_install_var): Apply the $(EXEEXT) hack to
EXTRA_PROGRAMS as well as other _PROGRAMS.
--- automake.in.old Fri Jul 14 09:48:54 2000
+++ automake.in Fri Jul 14 09:49:25 2000
@@ -7188,15 +7188,6 @@
push (@result, $rcurs);
}
- # "EXTRA" shouldn't be used when generating clean targets,
- # all, or install targets.
- if ($X eq 'EXTRA')
- {
- # We used to warn if EXTRA_FOO was defined uselessly,
- # but this was annoying.
- next;
- }
-
# A blatant hack: we rewrite each _PROGRAMS primary to
# include EXEEXT when in Cygwin32 mode.
if ($seen_exeext && $primary eq 'PROGRAMS')
@@ -7261,6 +7252,15 @@
&define_pretty_variable ($one_name, $cond, @val);
}
}
+ }
+
+ # "EXTRA" shouldn't be used when generating clean targets,
+ # all, or install targets.
+ if ($X eq 'EXTRA')
+ {
+ # We used to warn if EXTRA_FOO was defined uselessly,
+ # but this was annoying.
+ next;
}
if ($do_clean)
--
(CC followups please.)
