tags 12495 + patch
close 12495
thanks
On 09/29/2012 08:18 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> Here is the patch finally. I will commit it in a couple of days if there
> are no objections. As usual, comments are welcome.
>
> 8< 8< 8< 8< 8< 8< 8< 8< 8<
tags 12495 + patch
thanks
On 09/28/2012 09:40 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
> Now I understand your objections, and I agree that the current Automake
> behaviour is a bug (albeit a minor one). I'll commit a fix in the next
> days.
>
Here is the patch finally. I will commit it in a couple of day
tags 12495 - moreinfo
thanks
On 09/27/2012 09:53 PM, Hib Eris wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On 09/24/2012 11:20 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
>> On 2012-09-27 10:38 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>
>> [...]
>>> Thanks for digging out all these details. However, I still don't understand
>>> why you consider the cu
On 2012-09-27 21:53 +0200, Hib Eris wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > Fortunately in this case, the rule to update fooconfig.h.in also
> > contains a simple touch command, so it does actually update the
> > target timestamp. But it would have been better to simply d
Hi all,
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> On 2012-09-27 10:38 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> On 09/24/2012 11:20 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Peter Johansson
>> > wrote:
>> >>> I have attached an example setup.
>> >>> After running 'autoreco
On 2012-09-27 10:38 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> On 09/24/2012 11:20 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
> >>> I have attached an example setup.
> >>> After running 'autoreconf -fi', I get a lib/Makefile.in with an rule
> >>> to create $(srcdir)/co
tags 12495 + moreinfo
thanks
Hello everybody, sorry for the late reply.
On 09/24/2012 11:20 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
>>> I have attached an example setup.
>>> After running 'autoreconf -fi', I get a lib/Makefile.in with an rule
>>> t
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
>> I have attached an example setup.
>> After running 'autoreconf -fi', I get a lib/Makefile.in with an rule
>> to create $(srcdir)/config-public.h.in calling $(AUTOHEADER).
>>
>>
> Yes, this looks like a bug IMVHO. The difference betwe
On 9/24/12 6:18 PM, Hib Eris wrote:
Hi Peter,
Thanks for looking into this.
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
I have the setup you describe, and I have not encountered the problem you
describe.
I have AC_CONFIG_HEADERS([config.h lib/config_public.h])
and there is no ru
Hi Peter,
Thanks for looking into this.
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 8:29 AM, Peter Johansson wrote:
>
> I have the setup you describe, and I have not encountered the problem you
> describe.
>
> I have AC_CONFIG_HEADERS([config.h lib/config_public.h])
>
> and there is no rule to create 'lib/config_pu
On 09/24/2012 01:57 AM, Hib Eris wrote:
Hi,
With AC_CONFIG_HEADERS(config.h subdir/myconfig.h) in configure.ac,
automake generates a target to build config.h.in with autoheader in
Makefile.in (as expected),
but it also generates a target in subdir/Makefile.in to build
subdir/myconfig.h.in which
11 matches
Mail list logo
