[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 20:20:12 -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)

(Robert, thanks for your responses and attention!)

I understand, and yet the .texi also says:

 Note that the directories listed in @code{SUBDIRS} are not required to
 contain @file{}s; only @file{Makefile}s (after configuration).
 This allows inclusion of libraries from packages which do not use Automake
 (such as @code{gettext}).

so there is clearly an intention/awareness of wanting to "play nice" with
other software.

> On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 10:02, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > Bug, I'd guess.
> > 
> > Why does automake/autoconf assume it is "in charge" of the directory
> > structure?
> I'll leave this to the core guys to answer. My understanding is that
> thats what automake is designed to handle though..
> Rob

reply via email to

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