[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Pathalogical behavior with "more" AM_CONDITIONAL()s?
From: |
Harlan Stenn |
Subject: |
Re: Pathalogical behavior with "more" AM_CONDITIONAL()s? |
Date: |
Fri, 02 Aug 2002 20:08:41 -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) |
I'll work on posting an example.
We do not use @x@ to expand subdir lists; that forces too much info into
configure.XX.
We write either:
if FOO
SUBDIRS = a b c
endif
or
if FOO
X_DIRS = a b
endif
SUBDIRS = $(X_DIRS) d e
Again, I'm not sure why automake cares about SUBDIRS. From the .texi:
Although the @code{SUBDIRS} macro can contain configure substitutions
(e.g. @samp{@@DIRS@@}); Automake itself does not actually examine the
contents of this variable.
H
--
> On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 09:50, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > I've done a bit more testing.
> >
> > The slowdown happens if I only modify 1 Makefile.am, and it seems to be
> > related to using SUBDIRS inside an AM_CONDITIONAL.
> >
> > If I change the Makefile.am to use a non-SUBDIRS variable inside the
> > conditional autmake zips right along.
>
> Can you post your example?
>
> The usual approach to SUBDIRS is something like:
>
> DIST_SUBDIRS = every subdir you may or may not want
> SUBDIRS = every compulsory subdir @optionalsubdirlist1@
> @optionalsubdirlist2@
>
>
> Are you doing something different?
>
> Rob