This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: Question marks in Makefile.in
- To: Pavel Roskin <proski at gnu dot org>
- Subject: Re: Question marks in Makefile.in
- From: akim at lrde dot epita dot fr
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 02:18:12 +0100
- Cc: automake at gnu dot org, Akim Demaille <akim at epita dot fr>
- List-Id: Discussion list for automake <automake.gnu.org>
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0102251626430.18567-100000@woburn.localdomain>
On Sun, Feb 25, 2001 at 04:31:43PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello, Akim!
>
> The version 1.272 of the top-level Makefile.in that you submitted today to
> the Automake CVS contains the following lines:
>
> ?EXEC?insexec-data-am: install-info-am
> ?!EXEC?install-data-am: install-info-am
>
> I believe those question marks are supposed to be processed by Automake.
> They should not appear in Makefile.in. Something must be wrong in your
> patches.
Thanks Pavel!
I will look at this tomorrow and fix it. Without looking at the code, I
think I must have been somewhat too systematic Iin inserting ?EXEC?, I
don't think info page should depend on exec vs. data. Tom? I'm not sure
of myself, there are some rules Tom is trying to teach me, but something
escapes from my understanding.
Still, this bug can be easily detected by automake. But @FOO@ bugs
are harder since we share @ with AC_SUBST. I would really love to
use %FOO% instead in Automake. Tom, what do you think? This would
make it possible for automake to check what it outputs.