GNU bug report logs - #9890
cosmetic bug in AM_MAINTAINER_MODE

Previous Next

Package: automake;

Reported by: Zack Weinberg <zackw <at> panix.com>

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:48:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Zack Weinberg <zackw <at> panix.com>
Subject: bug#9890: closed (Re: bug#9890: cosmetic bug in AM_MAINTAINER_MODE)
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 10:35:05 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Your bug report

#9890: cosmetic bug in AM_MAINTAINER_MODE

which was filed against the automake package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 9890 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
9890: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9890
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems
[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zackw <at> panix.com>
Cc: 9890-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#9890: cosmetic bug in AM_MAINTAINER_MODE
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:31:46 +0100
On Saturday 29 October 2011, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On 2011-10-29 3:18 AM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > Zack, are you the same "Zack Weinberg" already listed in the THANKS file
> > with the address "zack <at> codesourcery.com"?  If yes, should I update that
> > address?
> 
> Yes I am, and yes you should update that address.  I left CodeSourcery 
> in 2005, but I mean zackw <at> panix.com to remain valid indefinitely.
> 
I've amended the THANKS file, and pushed the patch.  I'm thus closing
this bug report.

Regards,
  Stefano

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]
From: Zack Weinberg <zackw <at> panix.com>
To: bug-automake <at> gnu.org
Subject: cosmetic bug in AM_MAINTAINER_MODE
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:37:34 -0700
[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]
If you use AM_MAINTAINER_MODE([enable]), configure will print

> checking whether to disable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles ... yes

when --disable-maintainer-mode was *not* given on the command line, and

> checking whether to disable maintainer-specific portions of Makefiles ... no

when it *was* given.  This states the opposite of what has actually happened.

The easiest way to fix this cosmetic bug is to not use
am_maintainer_other in the first argument to AC_MSG_CHECKING.  The
result code ($USE_MAINTAINER_MODE) is "yes" if maintainer mode is
enabled and "no" if it isn't, regardless of what the default was, so
it will always be correct to say "checking whether to enable ...".
Patch attached.

(Bug found in automake/aclocal 1.11, but maintainer.m4 doesn't seem to
have been modified in a long time.)

zw
[mm4.diff (text/x-patch, attachment)]

This bug report was last modified 13 years and 263 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.