Re: $(EXEEXT) in TESTS required?

Hi Simon, * Simon Josefsson wrote on Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:40:56AM CET: > > I wonder what the best idiom for gnulib should be. We probably do not > want to require automake CVS just yet. Should it be the one I'm using: > > TESTS += test-gc$(EXEEXT) > check_PROGRAMS += test-gc > > or should

Re: $(EXEEXT) in TESTS required?

Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Simon, > > * Simon Josefsson wrote on Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 10:40:56AM CET: >> >> I wonder what the best idiom for gnulib should be. We probably do not >> want to require automake CVS just yet. Should it be the one I'm using: >> >> TESTS += test-

Re: $(EXEEXT) in TESTS required?

Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > SJ> How about simply: > > SJ> tests_PROGRAMS += test-gc > [...] > SJ> Or something, I'm not really sure. I have always found this > SJ> redundancy a bit disturbing though. > > I don't think a new syntax is necessary since you can do > > TES