[changeset] Re: When do I need autogen and configure?

[Thorsten Meyer]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> The original idea of having both octMakefile and Makefile was that the
> Makefile would be a simple file that any version of Make could run so
> it should not have any targets like .PHONY that are specific to GNU
> Make.  I think we have deviated from this goal, but not by much, so it
> should be easy to fix that.  Instead of .PHONY, Makefile uses a target
> called FORCE, so the effect is the same as long as a file called FORCE
> is not accidentally created.
> 
> Also, the top-level Makefile should not be generated by configure so
> that if users just unpacked Octave and typed "make" the top-level
> Makefile would just check for octMakefile and it if was not present
> print some messages telling people to run configure.  I'm not sure why
> it is now distributed as a .in file, as that was never the intent.
> Also, it should not have any substitutions in it anyway.
> 
In the attached patch, I tried to do what you sketched above. Could you
have a look, especially if the changes in octMakefile.in are correct?

regards

Thorsten

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: remove_Makefile.in.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 11910 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octave-maintainers/attachments/20090208/1e4f4fdc/attachment-0001.bin