Re: CVS update: subversion/subversion/tests-common Makefile.am

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 02:29:21AM -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 03:41:12AM -0000, brane@tigris.org wrote:
> >...
> > --- Makefile.am 2000/12/22 21:25:38 1.14
> > +++ Makefile.am 2001/01/25 03:41:07 1.15
> > @@ -12,6 +12,12 @@
> >
> > ACLOCAL = @ACLOCAL@ -I ac-helpers
> >
> > +## Note, we have to add these in so that they get included in the distribution
> > +EXTRA_DIST = ac-helpers/berkeley-db.m4 ac-helpers/config.guess \
> > + ac-helpers/config.sub ac-helpers/install-sh ac-helpers/ltconfig \
> > + ac-helpers/ltmain.sh ac-helpers/missing ac-helpers/mkinstalldirs \
> > + ac-helpers/svn-apache.m4 ac-helpers/svn-macros.m4
>
> We distribute an already-built configure. We don't need the .m4 files.
>

Good point, I just noticed that some of the files were missing, so I
added all of the ones from that directory.

> >...
> > +SVN_CLIENT_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/client'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_CLIENT_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_CLIENT_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_client'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_CLIENT_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_DELTA_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_delta'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_DELTA_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_FS_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_fs'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_FS_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_RA_DAV_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_ra_dav'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_RA_DAV_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_SUBR_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_subr'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_SUBR_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_LIBSVN_WC_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/libsvn_wc'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_LIBSVN_WC_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_MOD_DAV_SVN_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/mod_dav_svn'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_MOD_DAV_SVN_INCLUDES)
> >...
> > +SVN_TESTS_COMMON_INCLUDES='-I$(top_srcdir)/subversion/tests-common'
> > +AC_SUBST(SVN_TESTS_COMMON_INCLUDES)
>
> None of those directories are supposed to publish include files. I think
> that we should avoid the extra work (and the resulting sed substitution time
> caused by defining them). Defining these might also give the impression
> they're supposed to be published.

I was thinking about this yesterday as I was working on the patch. The
reason I included them is that several of the test suites rely on
non-published includes from the library they are testing. I guess we
could either remove those dependencies, or use -I@srcdir@/.. in the
Makefiles instead. I just thought I would put them in since they seem
to be used, but I agree that they really don't belong.

Let me know what you all think about it.

>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> --
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
> ____________________________________________________________

-- 
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kevin Pilch-Bisson
kevin@pilch-bisson.net
http://www.pilch-bisson.net