Re: Automake,cygwin: 'make clean' with libtool wrappers...

[Alexandre Duret-Lutz]

>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:

 >>>>>> "Charles" == Charles Wilson <address@hidden> writes:
 Charles> However, does *automake* use branches?  That is, will
 Charles> AM-1.6.2 come from HEAD, or from a 1.6 branch?

 Tom> 1.6.2 will come from the 1.6 branch, which is named `branch-1-6'.

 Charles> If automake-HEAD implements a change that causes 'make clean'
 Charles> to fail, but will not/can not be "fixed" until libtool
 Charles> releases a "compatible" version which has the 'working'
 Charles> --mode=clean, then can 1.6.2 EVER be released (in a working
 Charles> state) until after libtool+working_mode=clean is released?

 Tom> Nope.  And this isn't the kind of change we would make in 1.6.2.  For
 Tom> 1.7, though, it is a possibility.

 Tom> Alexandre, what do you think about checking in the "ugly" patch for
 Tom> 1.6.2?  It does definitely fix a bug.  I'm inclined to put it in with
 Tom> a big FIXME comment, and maybe an associated PR.

[I haven't read the whole thread.]

I understand what both `foo.$(EXEEXT)' and `foo' need to be
erased, but I fail to see the point in cleaning `.libs/':
doesn't clean-libtool already do that?  (I think people aren't
expected to call clean-binPROGRAMS, are they?)

Also, for simplicity I suggest dropping `test -f' and erasing
all files in a single `rm -f' call:

 .PHONY clean-am: clean-%DIR%PROGRAMS
 clean-%DIR%PROGRAMS:
-       -test -z "$(%DIR%_PROGRAMS)" || rm -f $(%DIR%_PROGRAMS)
+?!LIBTOOL?        -test -z "$(%DIR%_PROGRAMS)" || rm -f $(%DIR%_PROGRAMS)
+?LIBTOOL?      @list='$(%DIR%_PROGRAMS)'; for p in $$list; do \
+?LIBTOOL?        f=`echo $$p|sed 's/$(EXEEXT)$$//'`; \
+?LIBTOOL?        echo " rm -f $$p $$f"; \
+?LIBTOOL?        rm -f $$p $$f ; \
+?LIBTOOL?      done

-- 
Alexandre Duret-Lutz