Martin> I understand you're trying to get a new release out.
It isn't that. It's just that I (and, apparently, the other automake
hackers) have very little time.
Tom
Dear Tom Tromey, you wrote on Today:
> You might be in for a long wait, sorry.
I understand you're trying to get a new release out. I certainly don't
want to interfere with that, nor put any sort of pressure upon you
or other maintainers. At present I'd mainly like to know
- if these fetaures a
Martin> Last comment: If some day my Fortran/cpp patches get accepted
Martin> in some form for the autotools (btw: I'd appreciate some
Martin> feedback from the automake maintainers on the patch I
Martin> suggested)
You might be in for a long wait, sorry.
Tom
Dear Tom Tromey, you wrote on Today:
> We already handle this for C compilers. It just means writing a lot
> of cases.
Fine, but as I said, for 9 out of 10 compilers users would see the
message:
Checking for dependency style of f77 ... none
which is probably not what we want.
> Don't let me
> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom> Also, writing a dependency tool in a portable way seems hard.
In particular if you consider the lexical flexibility of Fortran. It
is reasonable to require a particular form of include/INCLUDE
etc. from the maintainers who are making th
Martin> Wrt to supporting every compiler, let's forget about it. So
Martin> far I haven't seen a single compiler with decent dependency
Martin> tracking support. And even if they did, you can be certain
Martin> that each and every one would use a different option syntax
Martin> and output format.
Dear Tom Tromey, you wrote on Yesterday:
> Actually, ideally we'd like to support every compiler. However, I
> think we'd also rather avoid distributing a complete Fortran
> dependency-finding tool with every Fortran-using package. This is
> hardly ideal, I guess.
Wrt to supporting every compi
Martin> If I understand the automake philosophy right, then it
Martin> suffices to support only a few compilers, generate the
Martin> dependencies on the maintainer's site, and include them into
Martin> the distributed Makefiles.
Actually, ideally we'd like to support every compiler. However, I
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Could you submit a bug report to the automake Gnats? Mark it
> "critical/high". We need to fix this before the next release.
> There should be a link to Gnats from http://sourceware.cygnus.com/automake/
> Thanks.
Just sent it in. I just discovered that
LUDE. This way you get complete
dependency tracking as a side effect of compilation.
Writing a patch to g77 to do this shouldn't be all that hard.
Martin> - whether such a thing like Fortran dependency tracking is
Martin> desirable at all in automake/autoconf,
Yes.
Martin> - if yes,
need (almost) a fully-fledged Fortran parser,
and I cowardly refuse to start writing one (I have considered stripping
down the parsers of either f2c or g77, but even that looks like a huge
amount of work).
Could anyone comment on
- whether such a thing like Fortran dependency tracking is desirable
11 matches
Mail list logo
