On 02/23/2012 03:17 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> This patch converts the automake-provided '*.am' fragments, and
> related files, to the use of new quoting format 'like this' or
> "like this" rather than `like this'.
>
> This is done for consistency with the new recommendations in the GNU
> Codi
On 02/23/2012 02:23 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> This commit has been for the greatest part autogenerated, but has
> also required some manual tweaking and adjustments. A review would
> thus be very welcome. I will wait until tomorrow before pushing.
>
> The patch is attached compressed; its s
On 02/23/2012 09:51 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> The final bunch of patches implementing the change of quoting convention
> (from `this' to either 'this' or "this") to adhere to the new GCS
> recommendations. The patches are attached (compressed). Below are their
> log message and statistics.
* configure.ac: Fix a typo in comments.
* aclocal.in: Get rid of latest form-feed (^L) usages.
* automake.in: Likewise.
---
aclocal.in |2 +-
automake.in |3 ---
configure.ac |2 +-
3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/aclocal.in b/aclocal.in
index 70ce0c0.
Do this for consistency with what is done with other compilers.
* configure.ac: Look for GNU java compiler at configure time.
* tests/defs (gcj): Adjust and simplify.
($am__tool_prefix): Remove definition, it's not used anymore.
---
configure.ac |8
tests/defs | 16 ++
* lib/Automake/Options.pm: Prefer leading spaces to leading tabs
throughout. Minor whitespace and comment changes.
(_process_option_list): Simple refactoring to make the code more
pleasant to read and easier to modify in the future. This
refactoring also reduces code duplication, with the help of
severity 10878 wishlist
tags 10878 wontfix
close 10878
thanks
On 02/24/2012 08:09 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>
> Automake should at least add user write permissions to all files in
> distdir prior to running dist-hook (and hence prior to generating the
> distribution tarball).
>
I disagree; in case t
On 02/24/2012 06:53 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> On 2012-02-24 18:37 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> [...]
>> On 02/24/2012 08:09 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>>> Automake should at least add user write permissions to all files in
>>> distdir prior to running dist-hook (and hence prior to generating the
>>
On 2012-02-24 18:37 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
[...]
> On 02/24/2012 08:09 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > Automake should at least add user write permissions to all files in
> > distdir prior to running dist-hook (and hence prior to generating the
> > distribution tarball).
>
> I disagree; in case
On 2012-02-24 19:19 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 06:53 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > On 2012-02-24 18:37 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > [...]
> >> On 02/24/2012 08:09 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> >>> Automake should at least add user write permissions to all files in
> >>> distdir
On 02/24/2012 11:34 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>> But it's the package that expects its distributed files to be writable
>> that is assuming too much; if such package wants its expectation to
>> safely hold, it should add something like this in its 'dist-hook':
>>
>> find $(distdir) -exec chmod u+w
On 02/24/2012 07:34 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>
> On 2012-02-24 19:19 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>
>> But it's the package that expects its distributed files to be writable
>> that is assuming too much; if such package wants its expectation to
>> safely hold, it should add something like this in
On 2012-02-24 12:10 -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 11:34 AM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> >> But it's the package that expects its distributed files to be writable
> >> that is assuming too much; if such package wants its expectation to
> >> safely hold, it should add something like this in its '
On 02/24/2012 08:25 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> (I'll update my patch to have it test also such usage).
>
And here it is the updated patch. I will push it shortly if there is
no objection.
Regards,
Stefano
On 02/24/2012 08:35 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:25 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> (I'll update my patch to have it test also such usage).
>>
> And here it is the updated patch. I will push it shortly if there is
> no objection.
>
Maybe it would have been nice actually attachi
On 02/24/2012 08:34 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>
> On 2012-02-24 12:10 -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
>
> [BIG SNIP]
>
>> Which is _why_ 'make distcheck' intentionally checks that 'make dist'
>> from a read-only source tarball will accurately create a tarball.
>
> It checks that it creates a tarball, but as
On 2012-02-24 20:25 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 07:34 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> >
> > On 2012-02-24 19:19 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> >>
> >> But it's the package that expects its distributed files to be writable
> >> that is assuming too much; if such package wants its exp
On 2012-02-24 20:39 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 02/24/2012 08:35 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > On 02/24/2012 08:25 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> >> (I'll update my patch to have it test also such usage).
> >>
> > And here it is the updated patch. I will push it shortly if there is
> >
On 02/24/2012 09:15 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>
> On 2012-02-24 20:25 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
>> On 02/24/2012 07:34 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
>>
>>> (I find it is generally good practice for -hook and -local
>>> targets to use prerequisites with commands instead of putting commands
>>> directl
19 matches
Mail list logo
