On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 23:50 +0400, Ilya N. Golubev wrote:
> This may seem justified, and is at least understandable. And
> complying with all of this takes in most cases even more work than
> isolating (and even possibly fixing) the bug entirely on one's own.
> So the posting becomes pointless.
Y
As for the original (not of make) issue, confirming my [not a bug]
posted on Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:49:44 +0400
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>).
As for attitude expressed in your reply of Wed, 20 Aug 2008 02:57:21
+0400 (MSD)
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>), it is
pretty widespread in many free sofware mailing lists, fo
Considering what desribed in posted on
Tue, 19 Aug 2008 23:55:34 +0400 to
(<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) to be bug of `make' input, more
precisely, that of automake (generating said input). The issue for
`make' considering thus closed, not a bug, invalid.
My apologies.
Described the automake bug in
po
"Ilya N. Golubev" wrote:
> This also means that, with unchanged `Makefile' generated
> automatically, can not remake it.
This seems like an automake question, not a make question. Automake has
the notion of a 'maintainer mode', wherein if the configure.ac specifies
AM_MAINTAINER_MODE then the ru
On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Ilya N. Golubev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> Occurs in any `Makefile' obtained from
> Makefile.in generated by automake 1.10.1 from Makefile.am.
> so reproducing should be easy.
You'd rather make people download and install something they may not
need instead o
Version: 3.81
Occurs in any `Makefile' obtained from
Makefile.in generated by automake 1.10.1 from Makefile.am.
so reproducing should be easy. `automake' args was:
--gnu
All `Makefile' modification was removing `Makefile' target. The
reason was obvious: otherwise `make' would fail due to `M
