> "Larry" == Larry Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Larry> It works save for one bug:
Grr. Thanks for testing this.
Tom
Tom Tromey writes:
>
> Can you test the appended patch? If it works I will check it in. I
> don't have access to a BSD `make' to try it.
It works save for one bug:
> Index: m4/make.m4
[...]
> @@ -11,14 +10,27 @@
> # If we don't find an include dir
Tom Tromey writes:
>
> >>>>> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Derek> A new bug report on the BSD make's include syntax... sounds
> Derek> like we're pretty close.
>
> Can you test the appended pat
>>>>> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> A new bug report on the BSD make's include syntax... sounds
Derek> like we're pretty close.
Can you test the appended patch? If it works I will check it in. I
don't hav
A new bug report on the BSD make's include syntax... sounds like we're
pretty close.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solutions Architect ( http://CVSHome.org )
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] CollabNet ( http://collab.net )
--
I am not authorized to fire substitute teachers.
I am
>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm surprised Make doesn't speak here. Reading the test files, GNU
>> Make is required, and GNU Make is usually verbose. In my case I have:
Lars> I'm using BSD make here.
> > I'm using BSD make here. That's the whole point of the exercise.
> > Requiring GNU make doesn't make much sense IMHO.
>
> OK, sorry. So actually you skip the GNU Make test, right? Is it
> possible to have some verbose output from BSD Make?
There are
Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm surprised Make doesn't speak here. Reading the test files, GNU
> > Make is required, and GNU Make is usually verbose. In my case I have:
>
> I'm using BSD make here. That's the whole point of the
> I'm surprised Make doesn't speak here. Reading the test files, GNU
> Make is required, and GNU Make is usually verbose. In my case I have:
I'm using BSD make here. That's the whole point of the exercise.
Requiring GNU make doesn't make much sense IMHO.
Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> === Running test ./target-cflags.test
> automake: Makefile.am: installing `./compile'
> creating cache ./config.cache
[...]
> creating ./config.status
> creating Makefile
> gcc -DPACKAGE=\"target-cflags\" -DVERSION=\"0.0\" -I. -I..-DFOO -g -O2 -c
[Sorry, should've posted this to the list sooner. The system is OpenBSD 2.8
m68k (amiga). If necessary, I can try the same on i386.
This was automake-1.4c, but 1.4e has the same problems.]
Tom Tromey writes:
> Could you run this and send me the output?
>
> make TESTS='pr19.test target-
>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Hecking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Could somebody with access to the BSD make please try the current cvs
>> automake and report back?
Lars> What exactly do you want us to try apart from make check?
I believe that should
Tom Tromey writes:
> Could somebody with access to the BSD make please try the current cvs
> automake and report back?
>
> I've tried to implement support for `.include'. I think it works, but
> of course I'm not copmletely sure.
What exactly do you want us to
Could somebody with access to the BSD make please try the current cvs
automake and report back?
I've tried to implement support for `.include'. I think it works, but
of course I'm not copmletely sure.
This new code does rely on `MAKE' being set at configure time to the
make
>>>>> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> Found another bug in automake's support for dependencies using
Derek> BSD's make. This one is based on the fact that BSD make
Derek> doesn't allow comments to continue on
> "Derek" == Derek R Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Derek> It seems some BSD makes don't look through VPATH for targets
Derek> either (i.e. when they're not found in $(builddir) make assumes
Derek> they are missing and rebuilds).
Are you configuring with srcdir != builddir?
This case is
[ On Tuesday, January 16, 2001 at 12:19:50 (-0500), Derek R. Price wrote: ]
> Subject: Another problem with BSD Make
>
> It seems some BSD makes don't look through VPATH for targets either
> (i.e. when they're not found in $(builddir) make assumes they are
> missing
It seems some BSD makes don't look through VPATH for targets either
(i.e. when they're not found in $(builddir) make assumes they are
missing and rebuilds).
Mostly this isn't a problem, but there are a few cases where it is. For
example, info targets are rebuilt every time and I can't create a
*
Found another bug in automake's support for dependencies using BSD's make. This
one is based on the fact that BSD make doesn't allow comments to continue on the
next line using '\'. I just hooked into the existing conditional machinery
instead of stuffing "\@AMD
Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Derek> Apparently BSD wants something like the following:
> Derek> .include "file"
> Derek> or
> Derek> .include
>
> Yuck. Does make have -I options too?
Yes. From make(1):
-I directory
Specify a directory in which to search
Tom Tromey wrote:Derek> Apparently BSD wants something like the following:
> Derek> .include "file"
> Derek> or
> Derek> .include
>
> Yuck. Does make have -I options too?
Don't know. I didn't actually have a BSD box until last week and I haven't
touched it over the last few days. I'l
Derek> Is there any support in Automake for BSD make's style of includes?
Nope but we really ought to add it.
Historically I've been reluctant to do any checking of properties of
make from configure. The theory is that the user could use any make
after configure is finished, so you can't really
Is there any support in Automake for BSD make's style of includes?
Apparently BSD wants something like the following:
.include "file"
or
.include
Where "" and <> have similiar meanings to what they would have in a C
program include.
Derek
--
Derek Price CVS Solu
23 matches
Mail list logo
