* Steffen Dettmer wrote on Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 09:05:21AM CET: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * David Bruce wrote on Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:16:34PM CET: > >> > DISTCLEANFILES = _configs.sed esio/esio-config.h > > distclean-local: distclean-ax-prefix-config-h > > > > Using the -local targets is the recommended way to extend targets, > > Hope it is OK to ask another automake question here, to ensure I > understood correctly: > > Does this mean that in general distclean-local should be prefered > over DISTCLEANFILES? No, that is not what I meant to say. I meant to say only what I wrote explicitly. Alternatively to my previous suggestion, you can also distribute a fragment.am snippet DISTCLEANFILES += _configs.sed $(whatever_other_header) but the slight disadvantage of that is that you have to document for your users the requirement to initialize DISTCLEANFILES in their Makefile.am before including your fragment. Other than that, the two options are fairly equivalent (OK, the distclean-local one involves 1-2 more fork&execs, but hey, who cares in this case). Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
