Re: docs/Makefile.am

[Bastian M. <bma...@we...>]

Am 23.06.2013 23:06, schrieb Hans-Bernhard Bröker:
> On 23.06.2013 22:01, Bastian Märkisch wrote:
>> It looks to me like docs/Makefile.am contains a hard-coded copy
>> of the contents of src/makefile.all (which is auto-generated).  Is
>> there a reason not to just 'include' src/makefile.all?
>
> It's not actually a full copy (Makefile.all only has CORETERM, not
> COREOBJS).  And there might be a chicken-and-egg problem, what with
> docs/Makefile.am being a primary, non-generated file, and
> src/makefile.all a generated one.

Those COREOBJS won't do any harm though, would they?

>
> Nor would that "include" command necessarily do what you expect, either,
> since it'd be processed by automake rather than make.

I actually gave this a try before suggesting it.  Adding an "include" to 
docs/Makefile.am causes the generated docs/Makefile.in and docs/Makefile 
to contain a copy of src/makefile.all.  So, it seems to work just fine, 
but you might be right about the chicken-and-egg problem.

>
> The typical gnuplot way would be to generate docs/Makefile.am at
> ./prepare time, too, just like the instances of CORETERM in
> term/Makefile.am and src/makefile.all
>

Avoiding hard-coded lists would be a worthwhile project in my opinion. 
But I would probably not have enough expertise using autotools to do 
that myself.