[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Recursive targets for the user
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: Recursive targets for the user |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Oct 2010 21:13:41 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-08-04) |
Hello Stefano,
* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 02:56:08AM CEST:
> On Sunday 01 August 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > 3) Whether to document the s/$/-am/ rule for the per-directory
> > target so it then also holds for user-provided recursive rules.
> > (If yes, then we could share the rule code text between both.)
> What about getting rid of the old `foo-am' targets altogheter,
> substituting them with `foo-local' instead, which is more natural and
> intuitive?
The *-am naming is unfortunately used by several packages already too
(yes, they override e.g., all-am) and I'm not sure whether I want to
break that.
> Then we could let the user implement his own recursive
> targets in a uniform fashion w.r.t. automake-generated recursive
> targets (and thus also still share the rule code text).
Not sure what you mean here.
Thanks,
Ralf
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/05
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/06
- Re: Recursive targets for the user,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/07
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/07
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/07
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/07
- Re: Recursive targets for the user, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/08
- extending automake targets (was: Re: Recursive targets for the user), Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/08
- Re: extending automake targets, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/11
- Re: extending automake targets, Stefano Lattarini, 2010/10/12