> Jan proposed SCons [0], and after having read SCons User Manual, I > think we could make good use of it. However, SCons has severe speed > issues, which Waf [1], one of his younger (and Python-based, just > like SCons) competitors, doesn't have -- see benchmarks [2] and [3].
Please have a look at tup too: http://gittup.org/tup/ This article http://gittup.org/tup/build_system_rules_and_algorithms.pdf is perhaps one of the most important ones in the last few years w.r.t. make tools. This tool is *extremely* fast, and it cleans up extremely well. Both arguments are quite important IMHO since lilypond has really zillions of files. This tool is probably not completely mature, but it is worth a look, and I assume that the author is quite willing to assist to fix problems. BTW, the corresponding thread in the hel-make mailing list starts here: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-make/2009-06/msg00013.html Werner _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
