[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section
From: |
Jim Meyering |
Subject: |
Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section |
Date: |
Wed, 08 Dec 2004 10:57:20 +0100 |
Stepan Kasal <address@hidden> wrote:
> I have read the node (automake)LIBOBJS and I understand now that using
> AC_LIBSOURCES is the way which Alexandre recommends. And I learned to
> trust him. So there is no doubt gnulib has to go this way.
>
> The advantage of AC_LIBSOURCES is that many gnulib modules will have no
> Makefile.am fragments, which saves typing (pasting) for people who don't
> use gnulib-tool.
>
> The disadvantage is that Automake is too magical here. We have the rule
> that only files listed in the Makefile.am get distributed, and this is
> yet another exception to the rule...
Which/whose rule is that?
Maybe you're thinking of Makefile.in?
I think the `magic' of automake is just fine.
I'd rather not have to have to remember to add new files
in two or three places if Automake can do it for me.
As I recall, one of the primary goals of automake
has always been to simplify and shorten Makefile.am files.
There are many examples of files that are distributed
yet not listed in Makefile.am.
- [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section, Jim Meyering, 2004/12/06
- Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section, Bruno Haible, 2004/12/06
- Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section, Bruno Haible, 2004/12/06
- Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section, Jim Meyering, 2004/12/07
- Re: [bug-gnulib] using AC_LIBSOURCES: complementing the `Files:' section, Karl Berry, 2004/12/07