Karl Berry <karl@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org
.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jul 2025 21:40:44 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 19 17:40:44 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45442 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1udFIR-0007vA-Rj for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jul 2025 17:40:44 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:57880) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <karl@HIDDEN>) id 1udFIP-0007tp-7k for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jul 2025 17:40:42 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <karl@HIDDEN>) id 1udFHp-0000Zf-Jy; Sat, 19 Jul 2025 17:40:09 -0400 Received: from frenzy.freefriends.org ([198.99.81.75] helo=freefriends.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <karl@HIDDEN>) id 1udFHl-0007VK-Ig; Sat, 19 Jul 2025 17:40:04 -0400 X-Envelope-From: karl@HIDDEN Received: from freefriends.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefriends.org (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 56JLdkpe938681 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 19 Jul 2025 15:39:46 -0600 Received: (from karl@localhost) by freefriends.org (8.16.1/8.14.7/Submit) id 56JLdknQ938678; Sat, 19 Jul 2025 15:39:46 -0600 Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2025 15:39:46 -0600 Message-Id: <202507192139.56JLdknQ938678@HIDDEN> From: Karl Berry <karl@HIDDEN> To: eggert@HIDDEN Subject: Re: epsf.tex: New file In-Reply-To: <8a3cd93f-cac6-49b8-b470-3e0e31fc5bb1@HIDDEN> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.99.81.75; envelope-from=karl@HIDDEN; helo=freefriends.org X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: bug-gnulib@HIDDEN, bug-automake@HIDDEN, bruno@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Works for me, but don't we need to change the GNU coding standards to do even that? To my eyes, the coding standards only prescribe the existence of the various dvi targets and variables. They don't say that making dvi is a dependency of either check or installcheck. The distcheck target is not mentioned in the standards, so we can change its behavior with impunity. If we wanted to no longer require dvi files to be distributed with the other formats on www.gnu.org (which sounds fine to me), that would need a small change to maintain.texi. --best, karl.
Karl Berry <karl@HIDDEN>
:bug-automake@HIDDEN
.
Full text available.bug-automake@HIDDEN
:bug#79054
; Package automake
.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.