Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > I believe we are misunderstanding each other completely. > > Do you need more than one compiler simultaneously within one build tree? > If not: forget my answer. > If so: please explain why you would need this. > Then we can discuss further. > Yes, I have to build libraries for gcc 2.95.x, gcc 3.x and icc within one build. It is OK to give these libraries different names, e.g. libmylib_gcc3.a. > >>Anyway, if I introduce a line >> >> myexe: some_internal_tool_used_at_build_time >> >>then Automake shows the same misbehaviour: It assumes that >>I would like to redefine the build rule for myexe. > > > Well, that's just how `make' syntax works (portable make != GNU make). > Sorry, but this problem is not related to GNU make or any other make. The problem is that Automake assumes I would like to define my own build rule for myexe. Actually I just want to add a dependency line between myexe and some other file. AFAIK this is standard make syntax. My statement here is that it is not sufficient for Automake to look at just one line in Makefile.am to correctly identify build rules. Regards Harri _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
