Re: pattern rules example

* Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:46:32PM CEST: > () Ralf Wildenhues >Can we find a transformation that is known to most readers, not already >done by automake, general enough to be portable, and short enough to >serve as a quick example? If a real-world one can't b

Re: pattern rules example

() Ralf Wildenhues () Tue, 17 Aug 2010 21:33:15 +0200 there are a couple of reasons I'd prefer a slightly different example: [reasons] Thanks for the prompt review; i agree redundant overlap is undesirable. [...] SUFFIXES [...] Ack. Can we find a transformation that is known to mo

Re: [PATCHES] Docs on automatic dependency tracking

* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:05:25PM CEST: > So is: > * doc/automake.texi (Automatic dependency tracking): Fix typo. > acceptable? Sure. > > OK for maint if you agree. > I agree, and I think I should add your name to the ChangeLog entry. > OK? No need, but do however pl

Re: po / pot file integration: documentation

On 08/17/2010 05:19 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: >>> +po_maude_pot_MSGID_BUGS_ADDRESS = bug-maude@@yoyodyne.com >> >> There was an example domain for email addresses, but it wasn't >> example.com IIRC. Using some arbitrary other one is not nice > > It's not an arbitrary one.

Re: po / pot file integration: documentation

Hi Ralf, Thanks for the review of the spec. > > +This example uses wildcards. ... > > +...@smallexample > > +locale_POTS = po/maude.pot > > +po_maude_pot_SOURCES = src/**/*.c > > +po_maude_pot_SOURCES_EXCLUDE = src/version.c > > +...@end smallexample > > Can we omit this for now? It can still

Re: [PATCHES] Docs on automatic dependency tracking

At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:29:51PM CEST: > > From ef90f67c33297b361ac9630fd5fa8be5d2e463d5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > > 2001 From: Stefano Lattarini > > Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:23:47 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Fix ty

Re: [PATCHES] Docs on automatic dependency tracking (was: Testing a new compiler with Automake "simple tests")

[ dropped automake@ ] * Stefano Lattarini wrote on Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 10:29:51PM CEST: > From ef90f67c33297b361ac9630fd5fa8be5d2e463d5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Stefano Lattarini > Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:23:47 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Fix typo in manual (`Makefile.in' instead of

[PATCHES] Docs on automatic dependency tracking (was: Testing a new compiler with Automake "simple tests")

[From a discussion on autom...@gnu.org] At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Roberto Bagnara wrote: > On 08/17/10 13:26, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > > At Tuesday 17 August 2010, Roberto Bagnara wrote: > >> I would like to test a new special-purpose compiler > >> (which is part of a bigger project) using the

pattern rules example (was: Makefile to Makefile.am)

[ automake-patches@ added; followups can drop automake@ ] Hello Thien-Thi, * Thien-Thi Nguyen wrote on Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 02:22:31AM CEST: > () Ralf Wildenhues > () Sun, 15 Aug 2010 23:32:44 +0200 > >Yes, with a general example, please. > > I am unsure what "general example" means, precis

Re: po / pot file integration: documentation

Hi Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:24:58PM CEST: > In order to test our common understanding, and to prepare for the unit tests, > here is a proposed patch to the documentation. Feel free to put it on a > git branch. You can do it yourself, when we've hashed out all questio