* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 07:01:47PM CET: > On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Юрий Пухальский wrote: > > Aye, looks like it. > > > > I have no objections whatsoever, i just need some method to make it > > work, because it's my working project:) > > > To be honest, I'm starting to agree with Ralf more and more on these > issues; i.e., just " ... require a decent make ;-)".
For some setups and projects, yes. I don't think I've ever claimed that Automake should require GNU make outright. On the contrary. > And more than this -- brace yourself -- I'm starting to think that > automake should *really* start supporting *only* GNU make (at least > from version 3.75 or so). If you want support for this, then you need to discuss away the downsides (i.e., convince those _opposed_ to the idea, not the rest). The upsides are obvious. I was planing to introduce optional GNU make-specific code, and allowing to let the user specify "my project requires GNU make anyway", which would enable Automake to emit better code. Arguably more complex than requiring GNU make outright, but it wouldn't throw away all the make portability work that exists in Automake. But let me rephrase the critique in a poignant way: if you want to require GNU make anyway, what is your rational to not use quagmire instead of Automake? Cheers, Ralf
