[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Built sources and make distcheck

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Built sources and make distcheck
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 07:17:55 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Allan Caffee wrote on Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:43:02AM CET:
> Although I must admit I'm not sure what he means by 
> > > [...] this shouldn't matter for read-only trees iff your
> > > dependencies are set up correctly [...]
> I'm not really sure how else you could have generated.c on the source
> tree and not break dist-check, but then I'm probably missing something
> obvious.

With distcheck, the rule for generated.c should never be invoked in the
first place, as the distributed file should be up to date wrt. its

> Also, I don't want to split hairs here but isn't it less portable to use
> $@ in a non-suffix rule?

No.  Using $< is unportable outside of suffix rules, but $@ may be used


reply via email to

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