On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 06:36:47PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Klee had an interesting idea on this, that makes more sense I think. If > you look at all the different kinds of programs that are being packages > you notice that a lot of them fall into quite well-defined categories > such as Imake-based, automake-based, GNU-style, etc. > > It would make sense to make a single tool for each type that can be > used to handle a package of that type. So you get db_automake, db_gnu, > etc. This is a good way to organize such tools, but I'd like to make another suggestion: Rather than define helpers which are external programs, why not define helpers which are .include files for make -- there's a lot that goes on in a makefile which is repetitious and which isn't just external programs. -- Raul
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems David Welton
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
- Re: Increasing regularity of build sys... David Welton
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Santiago Vila
- Re: Increasing regularity of build sys... James LewisMoss
- Re: Increasing regularity of build... Santiago Vila
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Dale Scheetz
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Wichert Akkerman
- Re: Increasing regularity of build sys... Raul Miller
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Paul Slootman
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Chris Rutter
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Marco d'Itri
- Re: Increasing regularity of build systems Matthias Klose