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: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 10:15:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vgfx30t5.fsf@creche.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Keith Seitz's message of "Sun, 25 Nov 2001 11:43:30 -0800 (PST)"
>>>>> "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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
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 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vgfx30t5.fsf@creche.redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20011126092200.8_DkaIeW3Xq4V6b7ibTjXpIjOEL2pjwlgddDWcpnFVg@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0111251139420.23851-100000@makita.cygnus.com>
>>>>> "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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-11-26 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-10-05 7:09 Keith Seitz
2001-10-05 7:19 ` Tom Tromey
2001-10-05 8:19 ` Keith Seitz
2001-10-05 10:15 ` Tom Tromey [this message]
2001-11-26 9:22 ` Tom Tromey
2001-11-25 11:43 ` Keith Seitz
2001-11-24 15:53 ` Tom Tromey
2001-11-24 14:07 ` Keith Seitz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87vgfx30t5.fsf@creche.redhat.com \
--to=tromey@redhat.com \
--cc=insight@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=keiths@cygnus.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).