* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Mon, Aug 02, 2010 at 09:25:46PM CEST: > At Monday 02 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > Also, I'd like to have a way to specify a recursive targers which > > > should recurse in a limited set of a projects' subdirectories, > > > and not in all of $(SUBDIRS). Do you think this would be > > > possible/worthwhile? > > > > Can you give an example what this would be good for? > Yes, I'd like to be able to do what proposed in this old patch series > of mine: > <http://www.mail-archive.com/automake-patc...@gnu.org/msg01848.html> > without having to recurse to ugly cut-and-paste from lib/am/subdirs.am > internals, like this: Yes, that would be usable with the new approach I suggested. Thanks for reminding me of your older report. > > My idea was > > that if the user adds a recursive target but then doesn't specify > > an *-am rule in some directory, that the rule would just traverse > > that directory without doing anything by default. > But would it still recurse in that directory's subdirectories? Yes. > If yes, > everything's fine with your approach (even if we could then IMHO find > a better naming than `*-am' for recusrive rules, but this is a minor > point). Why, what's wrong with just documenting *-am? > Otherwise, if I wanted a recursive target `foo' descending in say, > bar/tests/ and baz/quux/tests/, it would still be necessary for > me to add dummy `foo-am' (or `foo'?) targets to bar/Makefile.am, > baz/Makefile.am and baz/quux/Makefile.am, and a dummy dependency like > `foo-am: foo' to bar/tests/Makefile.am and baz/quux/tests/Makefile.am. No; the idea is that these dummies are added by automake already. Hmm, we might still need a way to differentiate between recursions that need to go into $(DIST_SUBDIRS) rather than $(SUBDIRS) ... Cheers, Ralf
