[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Running ./config.status
From: |
Stepan Kasal |
Subject: |
Running ./config.status |
Date: |
Fri, 4 Feb 2005 08:53:51 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
Hi,
I proposed to the following change to a autoconf/tests/Makefile.am[1]:
atconfig: $(top_builddir)/config.status
- cd $(top_builddir) && ./config.status $(subdir)/$@
+ cd $(top_builddir) && $(SHELL) ./config.status $(subdir)/$@
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 12:59:28PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Shouldn't we fix Automake to match Autoconf, and not the reverse?
> The Autoconf manual always says to run ./config.status, without any
> shell.
The question: Why does Automake add "$(SHELL)" to the command?
The config.status contains some m4sh initilization at the beginning, so it
should be capable to be run as ./config.status.
A note, which is in fact a second question:
[1] No, that rule cannot be generated by Automake, as "tests/atconfig" is
registered via AC_CONFIG_COMMANDS. Using AC_CONFIG_FILES would mean that
people have to add a copy of atconfig.in to their tests subdirectory.
But it's quite possible that I'm missing something.
Thanks in advance for your help,
Stepan
- atconfig rule, Stepan Kasal, 2005/02/02
- Re: atconfig rule, Paul Eggert, 2005/02/03
- Running ./config.status,
Stepan Kasal <=
- Re: Running ./config.status, Noah Misch, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Ralf Corsepius, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Noah Misch, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Paul Eggert, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2005/02/04
- Re: Running ./config.status, Ralf Corsepius, 2005/02/04