Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/08/2013 10:11 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more >>> control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to >>> the agreed form ;-) -- whic

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/08/2013 05:13 AM, Miles Bader wrote: >>> Hmm, if that's the case, then I think "canon" is the wrong term to >>> use, as it typically implies that the result is still in the same >>> domain as the input. >>> >> Suggestions for a better name then? > > Dunno... something like "RELDIR_SYM" woul

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-08 09:45, Peter Rosin wrote: > Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more >> control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to >> the agreed form ;-) -- which if I'm not mistaken is: >> >> - make the seri

bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Fine as well. And of curse, if you want to speed thing up and have more > control on the final result, feel free to shepherd the pending patches to > the agreed form ;-) -- which if I'm not mistaken is: > > - make the series consist of only two patches, one introducing

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

>> Hmm, if that's the case, then I think "canon" is the wrong term to >> use, as it typically implies that the result is still in the same >> domain as the input. >> > Suggestions for a better name then? Dunno... something like "RELDIR_SYM" would make sense ... it's a symbol corresponding to RELD

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/07/2013 10:52 AM, Miles Bader wrote: >>> ... and "canon_reldir" means the same thing, except canonicalized? >>> >> Yes, "canonicalized" in a sense quite specific to Automake: >> >> >> >> >> So, for example, if %re

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/05/2013 02:01 AM, Miles Bader wrote: > %...% seems nice to me. > I'm fine to settle for that (see my reply to last mail from Peter for more details). > Incidentally, given the name, I assume the name "reldir" always refers > to a relative path? What is it relative to again? > The path of th

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

>> ... and "canon_reldir" means the same thing, except canonicalized? >> > Yes, "canonicalized" in a sense quite specific to Automake: > > > > So, for example, if %reldir% expands to 'foo/bar-baz.d', '%canon-reldir%' > w

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/05/2013 12:03 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-04 19:11, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> On 02/04/2013 06:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >>> So they aren't quite affected by configure, but they are dependent on >>> relative location, just like existing substitutions like @top_srcdir@ >>> are depende

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

%...% seems nice to me. I don't think "typability" should be a prime factor in deciding, especially such trivial issues such as shifted-characters (like 75% of punctuation in Makefiles is shifted on most keyboards); readability is _much_ more important (and readability in many cases means not too

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-04 19:11, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 02/04/2013 06:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >> So they aren't quite affected by configure, but they are dependent on >> relative location, just like existing substitutions like @top_srcdir@ >> are dependent on relative location. >> > Yes, but they are d

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 06:33 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 02/04/2013 10:19 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Because it would mix up very different concepts: a '@...@' substitution >> is meant for something that depends on configure-time check (or at >> least from code in configure), and is substituted the same

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 10:19 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Because it would mix up very different concepts: a '@...@' substitution > is meant for something that depends on configure-time check (or at > least from code in configure), and is substituted the same in *every* > Makefile and makefile fragment;

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 03:06 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-04 14:43, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> On 02/04/2013 01:04 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> I {{think}} this one will be the easiest on us all. >>> >> I tend to agree (but see Peter Johansson's proposal to use >> {AM_RELDIR} instead; what do you thin

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-04 14:43, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 02/04/2013 01:04 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> I {{think}} this one will be the easiest on us of all. BTW, that was a mix of "on us all" and "on all of us", if anyone didn't notice... >> > I tend to agree (but see Peter Johansson's proposal to use >

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 01:04 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-04 12:33, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> On 02/04/2013 10:35 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> Not sure what to do about it, or if it matters... >>> >> It does IMHO, since the failure you pointed out, albeit easy to >> work around, wouldn't be very obvi

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 01:44 PM, Peter Johansson wrote: > On 2/4/13 9:33 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> What about doubling the curly braces? As in '{{RELDIR}}'. >> Would that be tolerable? Other possibilities (none particularly >> pleasant either, IMHO): >> >>{+RELDIR+} >>{:RELDIR:} >>{.RELD

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2/4/13 9:33 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote: What about doubling the curly braces? As in '{{RELDIR}}'. Would that be tolerable? Other possibilities (none particularly pleasant either, IMHO): {+RELDIR+} {:RELDIR:} {.RELDIR.} {-RELDIR-} Other proposals? Using Automake's namespace, '

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-04 12:33, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 02/04/2013 10:35 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> Not sure what to do about it, or if it matters... >> > It does IMHO, since the failure you pointed out, albeit easy to > work around, wouldn't be very obvious to diagnose, from the point > of view of a non

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-04 12:23, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 02/04/2013 12:10 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: >> On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch >>> 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon >>> send them to the list to sim

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 10:35 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-04 00:10, Peter Rosin wrote: >> On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch >>> 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon >>> send them to the list to simplify

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 02/04/2013 12:10 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch >> 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon >> send them to the list to simplify review (I will drop the >> bug tracker from CC

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-04 00:10, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch >> 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon >> send them to the list to simplify review (I will drop the >> bug tracker from CC:,

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

On 2013-02-03 21:42, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > I've pushed the promised patches to the rewindable branch > 'experimental/preproc' (based off of maint). I'll also soon > send them to the list to simplify review (I will drop the > bug tracker from CC:, to avoid cluttering up the report). > > As us

Re: bug#13524: Improving user experience for non-recursive builds

tags 13524 + patch thanks [+cc automake-patches] Reference: On 01/28/2013 12:38 AM, Peter Rosin wrote: > Hi Stefano, > > On 2013-01-27 20:21, Stefano Lattarini wrote: >>> This time with documentation and a NEWS entry. I also fixed the case >>