Re: EXEEXT messing up extension substitutions on win32.

[Tim Van Holder]

Benoit Sigoure wrote:
> Hello
> My make distcheck fails on Windows because of the following:
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> check_PROGRAMS = \
>                  simple                 \
>                  xml-simple             \
>                  parentness             \
>                  destroy                \
>                  rm_all_trans           \
>                  unblock_all            \
>                  bug16                  \
>                  meta_data
> [..._SOURCES and stuff]
> TESTS = $(check_PROGRAMS:=.test)
> 
> $(TESTS):
>         for i in $(TESTS); do \
>           $(LN_S) -f $(top_srcdir)/build-aux/test.sh $$i || exit 1; \
>         done
> 
> EXTRA_DIST = $(TESTS:.test=.stdout)
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Automake automagically appends $EXEEXT (=.exe on Win32) to the check_PROGRAMS
> which entails that TESTS = simple.exe.test etc.. instead of simple.test etc..
> 
> make dist then looks for simple.exe.stdout (etc) instead of simple.stdout 
> (etc).
> 
> I tried several things such as
> TESTS = $(check_PROGRAMS:$(EXEEXT)=.test)
> (Makefile.am:38: check_PROGRAMS:$(EXEEXT: non-POSIX variable name) although it
> seems to work [with GNU make] (but I doubt the resulting Makefile is portable)
> 
> TESTS = $(check_PROGRAMS:$EXEEXT=.test)
> TESTS = $(check_PROGRAMS:${EXEEXT}=.test)
> (Both generated Makefile contains: TESTS = $(check_PROGRAMS) which is 
> obviously
> wrong).
> 
> So what's The Right Way of writing this?
> 
> Cheers [(c) Ralf],

Given that the "programs" are basically incarnations of a test script
and not binary executables, would it make sense to use check_SCRIPTS
instead of check_PROGRAMS?