On 06/15/2011 07:04 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
On 06/15/2011 02:18 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 06/15/2011 09:40 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
On Tuesday 14 June 2011, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 05:33:39PM CEST:
I would suggest to at least discourage using this in the documentation.
... I agree, and I will make the change soon. Maybe I can find a
couple of
examples of where the AM_DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS could be useful *and*
legitimate; which would make my change more meaningful.
DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS is useful in situations when a plain
"./configure" is not meaningful to a source tree, i.e. when a
source-tree mandatorily requires some configuration argument.
Such a source-tree is violating GNU Coding Standards.
a) DISTCHECK_CONFIGURE_FLAGS makes it compliant.
b) There are situations, in which it's technically very hard if not
impossible to make automake's vanilla "make distcheck" functional.
My real-world use case: A deep source-tree with about a dozen
AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS, with each of those being host-dependent, and the
whole source tree only supporting one target at a time.
On the other
hand, automake strives to be useful to more than just GCS-compliant
packages.
Agreed.
Ralf
