GNU bug report logs -
#77164
[PATCH] doc: SUFFIXES example typo.
Previous Next
To reply to this bug, email your comments to 77164 AT debbugs.gnu.org.
There is no need to reopen the bug first.
Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.
Report forwarded
to
bug-automake <at> gnu.org
:
bug#77164
; Package
automake
.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 06:38:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent
to
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou <nchatz314 <at> gmail.com>
:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to
bug-automake <at> gnu.org
.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 06:38:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello list,
See attachment for the patch; it's a trivial typo fix.
Regards,
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou
[0001-doc-SUFFIXES-example-typo.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]
Information forwarded
to
bug-automake <at> gnu.org
:
bug#77164
; Package
automake
.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 06:44:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #8 received at 77164 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Oops, my patch is incorrect. Please ignore it.
Regards,
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou
Reply sent
to
Karl Berry <karl <at> freefriends.org>
:
You have taken responsibility.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:06:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Notification sent
to
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou <nchatz314 <at> gmail.com>
:
bug acknowledged by developer.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:06:02 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #13 received at 77164-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Hi Nikolaos - thanks for the submission and the reversion :). I find
the existing text (and the companion suffix7.sh test) quite confusing,
but it does seem to be written as intended. So, closing.
Regarding the question you sent me separately, about still looking for
maintainers: most definitely. My time available for Automake is quite
limited. The link I put on https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/
to https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2021-03/msg00018.html
is still valid, despite being four years old.
Thanks,
Karl
Information forwarded
to
bug-automake <at> gnu.org
:
bug#77164
; Package
automake
.
(Sat, 22 Mar 2025 21:06:03 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded
to
bug-automake <at> gnu.org
:
bug#77164
; Package
automake
.
(Sun, 23 Mar 2025 03:20:05 GMT)
Full text and
rfc822 format available.
Message #19 received at 77164 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 5:05 PM Karl Berry <karl <at> freefriends.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Nikolaos - thanks for the submission and the reversion :). I find
> the existing text (and the companion suffix7.sh test) quite confusing,
> but it does seem to be written as intended. So, closing.
>
> Regarding the question you sent me separately, about still looking for
> maintainers: most definitely. My time available for Automake is quite
> limited. The link I put on https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/
> to https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2021-03/msg00018.html
> is still valid, despite being four years old.
Great, my plan is to attempt to add better support for the Guile
programming language to automake, so I will have to study it a decent
amount. Maybe I can offer a hand afterwards.
Regards,
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou
This bug report was last modified 12 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.