On Saturday, June 05, 2010 09:16:29 Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 17:56:38 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 02, 2010 09:17:00 Michał Górny wrote: > > > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 03:16:12 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > > use emake then and leverage make's implicit rules. > > > > > > The implicit make rules are less universal and -- in the fact -- > > > pretty poor. They're strictly make-dependant, which reduces the > > > amount of control over their behavior. In my opinion, if we should > > > ever use such behavior, it should be rather technical > > > implementation of the functions I'm proposing instead of inline use. > > > > ebuilds requires GNU make which means the implicit rules are > > "universal". not that i really know what you're talking about. the > > rules are also clearly documented and support all the proper flags we > > currently support. > > Ok, if we can surely assume 'emake' will always call GNU Make, then I > agree with your solution and withdraw my ideas.
i'm not saying `emake` covers all solutions you proposed, just that the base usage isnt nearly as bleak. there are some cases where having a wrapper around emake would be useful (such as compiling multiple files or linking things in). so if you wanted to slap something together, we can look at it further. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
