From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
To: Keith Seitz <keiths@cygnus.com>
Cc: Insight Maling List <insight@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Plugins: enhancements
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 09:22:00 -0000
Message-ID: <87vgfx30t5.fsf@creche.redhat.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0111251139420.23851-100000@makita.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-q4/msg00362.html
Message-ID: <20011126092200.8_DkaIeW3Xq4V6b7ibTjXpIjOEL2pjwlgddDWcpnFVg@z>

>>>>> "Keith" == Keith Seitz <keiths@cygnus.com> writes:

>> This syntax for `include' isn't portable.  Automake has a macro to
>> check for a few different include styles.  (Note that you can't be
>> guaranteed that there is any include directive, but such systems
>> aren't worth worrying about, imnsho.)

Keith> I'd love to use automake, but until I can get a clean split
Keith> between gdb and Insight's configury, I don't think this is
Keith> possible. So for now, I am stuck with using just Makefile.ins.

Yeah.  But you could use the macro from automake to get the correct
`include' syntax.

Another choice would be to use configure's facility to concatenate
multiple files.  That would keep the Makefile.in small but not rely on
make-time includes.

Tom