[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Augment instead of replace maude_DEPENDENCIES

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Augment instead of replace maude_DEPENDENCIES
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 07:40:18 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2010-08-04)

Hello Miles,

* Miles Bader wrote on Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 03:36:50AM CET:
> Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:
> >   - For programs and libraries, automake now detects
> >     adds them to the normal list of dependencies, but without
> > overwriting the
> >     foo_DEPENDENCIES variable, which is normally computed by automake.
> Hmm, is there a convention about whether to use names like
> I would have guessed the latter, as it seems more consistent (and a bit
> prettier)...

There is precedence for the former naming with EXTRA_foo_SOURCES:

     For each primary, there is one additional variable named by
  prepending `EXTRA_' to the primary name.  This variable is used to list
  objects that may or may not be built, depending on what `configure'
  decides.  [...]

That said, as this isn't in a released version yet there is time to fix
things if need be.  I just figured the above was reason enough to go
with the current name.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]