Re: Need more EXTRA_PROGRAMS variables

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Behdad Esfahbod wrote on Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 12:13:17AM CEST:
> On Sun, 2007-06-17 at 14:31 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: 
> 
> > If you can live with $(EXTRA_PROGRAMS) also
> > containing the tests, that is.  If not, then I'd like to know why not.
> 
> I can.  But as a separate issue, I think allowing things like
> EXTRA_something_PROGRAMS makes sense.  One thing I love about automake
> is its flexibility, and hardcoding some feature (automatically adding
> EXEEXT in this case) to some special variable names but not providing
> ways for the user to do the same is not consistent IMHO.

All fair.  Except I simply don't see a use case for this yet, nor do I
see what `something' should mean in this case.  If you can create a
sensible use case, let's see how to implement it.  IOW: where do you
need EXEEXT rewriting for something that is not an optionally built
program?

Cheers,
Ralf