Just my final proposed patch (re-)created with 'git format-patch'.
A note on the status of the FSF assignment process: I've already received the
necessary papers to sign.
We're currently checking who of my superiors is authorized to sign (the guys
involved in checking this are quite busy at the
On Thursday 18 August 2011, Nicolai Stange wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
Hi Nicolai, sorry for the awful delay.
> are there any further improvements I could do to make it easier for you
> to have a look? Or do you just haven't found time yet?
>
Mostly it's lack of time in general, and on my part al
Hello everybody,
are there any further improvements I could do to make it easier for you
to have a look? Or do you just haven't found time yet?
Please let me know if there is anything wrong with that diff's format or
whatever
Best,
Nicolai
Hi all,
I've read HACKING and http://sourceware.org/automake/contribute.html
once again:
- I removed the leading ampersands from my sub invocations.
- I converted my nasty_f90 into a testcase. It contains libtool and
non-libtool targets and preprocessed/non-preprocessed Fortran sources.
- My cha
Sorry, and here it is (see attachment). It's getting late here...
For the updated working example, see
ftp://ftp.zmaw.de/outgoing/stange/nasty_f90-0.3.tar.gz
am_fortran_module_interdeps-2011-08-15.diff.gz
Description: Binary data
Howdy all,
I just got aware of the fine AC_FC* macros from Autoconf trunk and
next to some very minor style modifications, I further improved my diff
to make use of AC_FC_MODULE_FLAG.
Now the whole stuff also works with Oracle SolarisStudio (former Sun
SunStudio), both on Debian Lenny and Solari
Hi everybody,
I cleaned up and partly rewrote my patch (see attachement) and I feel
comfortable with it now; in my opinion it is clear and working and is
nearly ready to be committed. There are only two question about how and
whether to do assertions in automake.in (grep for the two comments marke
Sorry, I've got the reference to the make info manual wrong in my change
to automake.texi. Fixed diff is attached.
Nicolai
am_fortran_module_interdeps-2011-08-12.diff.gz
Description: Binary data
Hi everybody,
I cleaned up and partly rewrote my patch (see attachement) and I feel
comfortable with it now; in my opinion it is clear and working and is
nearly ready to be committed. There are only two question about how and
whether to do assertions in automake.in (grep for the two comments
marke
On Thursday 28 July 2011, Nicolai Stange wrote:
> Howdy,
>
Hi Nicolai.
> Sorry, I broke VPATH builds for Fortran, see new diff attached which
> supersedes the previous one.
>
> Please keep in mind, that my patches are for discussion only they're by
> far not ready to be included into 'official' a
Howdy,
Sorry, I broke VPATH builds for Fortran, see new diff attached which
supersedes the previous one.
Please keep in mind, that my patches are for discussion only they're by
far not ready to be included into 'official' automake...
If this is the wrong mailinglist for this discussion, just tell
Hi everybody,
please forgive me for sending such a semi-finished work to you,
especially documentation is lacking. Since I'm new to automake
contributing, I expect many changes to be made.
This is what it's all about:
Say you've got two Fortran files, one defining and one using a module,
then the
12 matches
Mail list logo
