Karl Berry wrote:
> What do others think? Bruno, would you mind taking a look at Michael's
> message? https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=73769
The patch is wrong for three reasons:
1) Inversion of dependencies.
Gnulib relies on Automake. (And Automake relies on Autoconf. And
Aut
Hi Karl,
Karl Berry writes:
> What do others think? Bruno, would you mind taking a look at Michael's
> message? https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=73769
I'm not Bruno, but I feel like I know a bit about gnulib-tool. :)
I disagree with the patch since it doesn't work for every packag
Hi Michael,
* bin/automake.in (read_am_file): push "modules" subdirectory of
local gnulib directories to dist_common if it exists.
Thanks for the patch. I admit I know little about the usual way gnulib
is used nowadays, but my first reaction is that automake should not try
to incorporat
When gnulib-tool or a bootstrap script uses the option --local-dir,
include the "modules" files in a release with DIST_COMMON. Otherwise,
these source files are present in checkouts but not in distribution.
The resulting gnulib.mk from gnulib-tool has comments
with the options used to generate it:
