Re: -local vs. -hook?

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hi Karl,

* Karl Berry wrote on Sun, May 18, 2008 at 12:33:53AM CEST:
> Reading the Extending node in the automake 1.10.1 manual:
> 
>    However, various useful targets have a `-local' version 
>    ...
>    Some rule also have a way to run another rule, called a "hook"
     after their work is done.

> What I am missing is an explanation of the difference (from the user's
> perspective.

Well, does that half-sentence that I added above make it clearer?
With -local, there is no ordering guarantee (typically they are run
early, but with parallel make, there is no way to be sure of that),
while with hook, there is.

> That is, when to use install-exec-local and when
> install-exec-hook?  If it doesn't matter, then I think it would be worth
> saying so explicitly.

I'd say the above is terse

> Also:
> (a) "Some rule" is not grammatical here; it should be "Some rules".

Yep, fixed as below (HEAD and branch-1-10).

> (b) Shouldn't it be "Some targets also have a way to run another target"?

Hmm, is that just a very nitpicky remark or does it bear some meaning
that I've not yet grasped?  What gets run is the "rule" for *-hook,
so I fail to see why the current formulation should be wrong.

Thanks,
Ralf

2008-06-01  Ralf Wildenhues  <address@hidden>

        * doc/automake.texi (Extending): Fix grammar.
        Report by Karl Berry.

diff --git a/doc/automake.texi b/doc/automake.texi
index a8f3403..5517831 100644
--- a/doc/automake.texi
+++ b/doc/automake.texi
@@ -9287,7 +9287,7 @@ location, but you should avoid this.  (@pxref{Hard-Coded 
Install Paths})
 @cindex @option{-hook} targets
 @cindex hook targets
 
-Some rule also have a way to run another rule, called a @dfn{hook},
+Some rules also have a way to run another rule, called a @dfn{hook},
 after their work is done.  The hook is named after the principal target,
 with @samp{-hook} appended.  The targets allowing hooks are
 @code{install-data}, @code{install-exec}, @code{uninstall}, @code{dist},