>
> check out the fpmake.pp and fpmake.inc file scattered all over the source
> trees; and the sources in utils/fppkg do what you describe 'TInstaller'
> TBuildEngine etc.
>
> We are working on a 2-stage approach:
>
> fpmake:
> compile/install/zip one or more packages (loosely defined as a group
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006, L505 wrote:
>
> > > So basically my main point is that make files have become executable
> > > INI files - something INI files really aren't intended to be - with
> > > less power and clarity than a real pascal program.
> >
> > That's why FPC is switching to fpmake.pp files.
> > So basically my main point is that make files have become executable
> > INI files - something INI files really aren't intended to be - with
> > less power and clarity than a real pascal program.
>
> That's why FPC is switching to fpmake.pp files. And eventually/probably
> lazarus too.
Ohh.
In many cases makefiles take about just as long to create as
shell scripts or pascal programs - they just offer a nice framework to
automate compiling in an easy way - but in sort of a funny syntax. But
makefiles kind of become ugly when they get big - and because they have a poor
syntax com
On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 01:04:12 -0600
L505 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In many cases makefiles take about just as long to create as shell
> scripts or pascal programs - they just offer a nice framework to
> automate compiling in an easy way - but in sort of a funny syntax.
> But makefiles kind of be
