"Tom" == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom The reason is only historical. Feel free to change it.
I'm applying this. Sure, more clarification is needed in this area.
I find it especially hard to track failures of substitution since
Automake uses @FOO@ just like AC_SUBST :( Can't we
"Tom" == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Later we see:
Tom # Generate rule for `.o'. . 's/^\@EXT\@\.o:/' . $obj
Tom . '.o: ' . $source . '/g;'
Tom I think we need to quote $obj and $source here; this was handled
Tom in the old code.
I did not change anything in the
"Akim" == Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Akim First I want to write/enhance a test that fails on this.
Sorry for being that dumb. I finally understood the problem. Here is
what I'm applying:
Index: ChangeLog
from Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* automake.in
"Akim" == Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Akim First I want to write/enhance a test that fails on this.
Try `make TESTS=subobj4.test VERBOSE=t check'.
That will tell you all about the problem.
Tom
"Tom" == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Akim -- Your recent patches broke a couple of test cases.
Arg, thanks, I'll address them!
"Tom" == Tom Tromey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Akim -- Your recent patches broke a couple of test cases.
Tom I looked at the `subobj4' failure. I think the new code in
Tom add_depend2 is wrong.
Tom First, this is wrong:
Tom . transform ('$(' . $pfx . 'COMPILE)' = $rule,
I
"Akim" == Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Akim I looked at depend2.am:
Akim [ ... ]
Isn't it hideous? Eww.
Akim And I'd like to ask a question: why not using @COMPILE@ instead of
Akim replacing $(@PFX@COMPILE)? It seems cleaner to me, and less
Akim surprising for Sunday hackers :)
