ot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 7:52 PM
> Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
> > Hi edward,
> >
> > I have been snowed this week, but I plan to integrate the libtool p
ROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 7:52 PM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> Hi edward,
>
> I have been snowed this week, but I plan to integrate the li
to handle .exe extensions. I've enclosed *all of
> my changes* with respect to cvs libtool and automake.
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Gary V. Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, Marc
point for things cygwin.
(And those two tests fail on cygwin as well)..
Rob
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexandre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 6:12 PM
> To: Robert Collins
> Cc: edward; Akim Demaille; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ok,
On Mar 13, 2001, "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "The CVS version of GNU libtool often depends on some yet to be released
^
> versions of GNU Autoconf and GNU Automake."
> Just before the "Resources" section.
AFAIK, the current CVS version of
andre Oliva [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 5:12 PM
> To: Robert Collins
> Cc: edward; Akim Demaille; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
>
> On Mar 12, 2001, "Robert Collins"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2001, "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well as CVS libtool (the point of the exercise :]) depends on CVS
> automake & CVS autoconf
Does it? It shouldn't. Are you sure?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer
- Original Message -
From: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 11:51 PM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
> - Original Message -
>
> "tailbert" == tailbert writes:
>> Rather the proper fix seems to have the failing tests include
>> AC_EXEEXT and AC_OBJEXT in their configure.in.
tailbert> Akim, I mean in the general case, even outside of the test
tailbert> cases. On windows platforms, executables get a .exe
tailbert> e
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
> Huh? It is still wrong. Thi
| --- orig/automake.in.orig Mon Mar 12 06:44:59 2001
| +++ automake.in Mon Mar 12 07:44:57 2001
| @@ -1048,8 +1048,17 @@
| # If OBJEXT/EXEEXT were not set in configure.in, do it, it
| # simplifies our task, and anyway starting with Autoconf 2.50, it
| # will always be defined, and
- Original Message -
From: "Akim Demaille" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> "
ChangeLog:
2001-03-12 Edward M. Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* progs.am: install patch for Cygwin. The cygwin /usr/bin/install
program has the following behavior for install -c SRC DST:
Scenario 1: "src.exe" exists and "src" does not:
1) if SRC=src.exe and DST=dst.e
"edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> prior to this patch, automake would not generate rules for
> foo_SOURCES -> foo_OBJECTS etc. now it does, and the conditionals determine
> which get executed
I have plenty of patches in the queue that address things related to
this issue :(
> 1) a
"edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> cond3.test fails for three reasons.
Thanks, the fix has been applied.
> 3) cond3.test has an incorrect comparison test function (the sed script
> skips a line!) sorry, i'm not a big fan of sed. oh well.
I had reworked the snippet in the meanwhile. It
the fix for pr19.test i posted is not intended to *fix* the test. rather, it
is meant for it to fail for the *same* reasons on any other platform that
uses gnu make, as opposed to failing because of a cygwin thing.
gnu make will remove intermediate targets, so make dist fails because foo.c
is an
-- Original Message -
From: "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 2:01 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> Thanks edward,
>
AIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> Thanks edward,
> when I started looking into those, I read somewhere in the automake
> pages, that the XFAIL results, are "expected fa
al Message -
From: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
>
SNIP> > and had the following tests fail:
> > XFAIL: cond3.test
>
>
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "edward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 5:14 AM
Subject: Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates
> Hi edward,
> I'm not sur
20 matches
Mail list logo
