Re: Typo in manual

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hi Reuben,

Thanks for the report.

* Reuben Thomas wrote on Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 05:30:53PM CEST:
> "None of these rules do support" -> "None of these rules supports"
>
> (Two corrections: "do" is redundant, "None" is singular.)

Hmm, I guess.  I needed to look at
<http://www.llrx.com/columns/grammar1.htm>
for a bit of support, though.  Then I found another instance of "none".

Cheers,
Ralf

2008-08-19  Reuben Thomas <address@hidden>  (tiny patch)

        * doc/automake.texi (Flag Variables Ordering, Per-Object Flags):
        Fix grammaro.

diff --git a/doc/automake.texi b/doc/automake.texi
index eccbc5d..265a3f8 100644
--- a/doc/automake.texi
+++ b/doc/automake.texi
@@ -10419,7 +10419,7 @@ DejaGnu tests (@pxref{Tests}) use 
@code{RUNTESTDEFAULTFLAGS} and
 (@pxref{Tags}) use @code{ETAGSFLAGS}, @code{AM_ETAGSFLAGS},
 @code{CTAGSFLAGS}, and @code{AM_CTAGSFLAGS}.  Java rules
 (@pxref{Java}) use @code{JAVACFLAGS} and @code{AM_JAVACFLAGS}.  None
-of these rules do support per-target flags (yet).
+of these rules supports per-target flags (yet).
 
 To some extent, even @code{AM_MAKEFLAGS} (@pxref{Subdirectories})
 obeys this naming scheme.  The slight difference is that
@@ -10516,7 +10516,7 @@ sources of the @emph{program} @code{foo}, it has 
nothing to do with
 @file{foo.c} or @file{foo-foo.o} specifically.
 
 What if @file{foo.c} needs to be compiled into @file{foo.o} using some
-specific flags, that none of the other files require?  Obviously
+specific flags, that none of the other files requires?  Obviously
 per-program flags are not directly applicable here.  Something like
 per-object flags are expected, i.e., flags that would be used only
 when creating @file{foo-foo.o}.  Automake does not support that,