Re: Patch: RFA: new option

[Akim Demaille]

 > Does 

 >    nodist_info_TEXINFOS = bar.texi

 > mean that bar.info* should not be distributed, or that bar.texi
 > should not be distributed?  The patch I mentioned assume the
 > latter, because this is closer to how nodist_ is used elsewhere.

 > Here are the possible scenarios that I'd like to support:

 >   a) bar.texi and bar.info both distributed
 >   b) bar.texi is distributed, but not bar.info
 >   c) neither bar.texi nor bar.info are distributed

 > That's three states, so a single nodist_/dist_ switch cannot be enough.
 > So far my idea was to use nodist_/dist_ to select whether *.texi
 > would be distributed, and rely on the EXTRA_DIST/CLEANFILES hackery
 > to decide about unmentioned files.

 > Thoughts?

Maybe we should take some inspiration from what's already done in the
rest of Automake.  Maybe there is too much syntactic sugar here, and
you want

    nodist_INFO = bar.info
    dist_bar_info_SOURCES = bar.texi
    bar_texi_DEPENDENCIES = foo.texi

with a bit of magic to have bar.info represent the whole bar*info
set.  That's a lot more verbose that the current situation, but it is
not new, hence the user has less to learn.

But there is still too much room for meaningless specs:

    nodist_INFO = bar.info
    dist_bar_info_SOURCES = bar.texi
    dist_PS = bar.ps something-written-by-hand.ps
    nodist_bar_ps_SOURCES = bar.texi
    bar_texi_DEPENDENCIES = foo.texi

here bar.texi is dist_ in line 2, and nodist_ in 4.