[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: top-level Makefile required?
From: |
Harlan Stenn |
Subject: |
Re: top-level Makefile required? |
Date: |
Fri, 02 Aug 2002 20:02:16 -0400 |
User-agent: |
EMH/1.10.0 SEMI/1.13.7 (Awazu) FLIM/1.13.2 (Kasanui) XEmacs/21.1 (patch 14) (Cuyahoga Valley) (i386--freebsd) |
Bug, I'd guess.
Why does automake/autoconf assume it is "in charge" of the directory
structure?
H
--
> On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 09:55, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > Is it a bug or a feature that when using automake+autoconf there Must be a
> > top-level Makefile?
> >
> > I tried to write a test case for automake (debugging the AM_CONDITIONAL
> > slowdown problem I'm seeing) and I wrote a top-level configure.ac that only
> > specified the following outputs:
> >
> > AC_CONFIG_FILE(a/Makefile)
> > AC_CONFIG_FILE(b/Makefile)
> > AC_OUTPUT
> >
> > and when I ran automake on this I never got either of those Makefile.in's
> > generated.
> >
> > What gives?
>
> Feature I guess :}. It doesn't make a lot of sense to have a
> non-existence top level Makefile, as you'd never recurse down the tree
> :}.
>
> Rob
>