Re: [7087] 4.2.0-pre-1

Re: [7087] 4.2.0-pre-1

[Peter Stephenson]

Danek Duvall wrote:
> Is there going to be any effort to incorporate into 4.2 Clint's patch in
> workers/16845, to link the libraries that only a module (and not the
> main zsh binary) depends on only to the module and not the zsh binary?
> It looks to me like the mail thread there had a little discussion, no
> real problems were found, but then it was dropped.

It used widely available but not necessarily universal `make'
extensions.

I certainly don't have any time to take on yet more configure
commitments myself, it's up to Clint.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@csr.com>                  Software Engineer
CSR Ltd., Science Park, Milton Road,
Cambridge, CB4 0WH, UK                          Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070


**********************************************************************
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
and/or privileged material. 
Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by 
persons or entities other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited. 
If you received this in error, please contact the sender and 
delete the material from any computer.
**********************************************************************

Re: [7087] 4.2.0-pre-1

[Clint Adams]

> It used widely available but not necessarily universal `make'
> extensions.

> I certainly don't have any time to take on yet more configure
> commitments myself, it's up to Clint.

I'll take a stab at forward-porting it.  I suppose I can try to test
whether make(1) supports 'include', '.include', or neither, and trying
to cope with the situation.

Re: 4.2.0-pre-1

[Danek Duvall]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 01:52:36AM -0500, Clint Adams wrote:

> > It used widely available but not necessarily universal `make'
> > extensions.
> 
> > I certainly don't have any time to take on yet more configure
> > commitments myself, it's up to Clint.
> 
> I'll take a stab at forward-porting it.  I suppose I can try to test
> whether make(1) supports 'include', '.include', or neither, and trying
> to cope with the situation.

Was there anything wrong with Bart's suggestion to just copy the
necessary rules directly into the generated Makefile?

Danek

Re: 4.2.0-pre-1

[Clint Adams]

> Was there anything wrong with Bart's suggestion to just copy the
> necessary rules directly into the generated Makefile?

I'm not sure how to get the Makefile dependencies correct in that case, 
but otherwise it could work.