This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: rfc: build system
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at wolery dot cumb dot org>
- Subject: Re: rfc: build system
- From: Richard Henderson <rth at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 00:04:34 -0800
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <200002010316.WAA11443@caip.rutgers.edu> <20000131210856.A529@wolery.cumb.org> <20000131224811.D679@cygnus.com> <20000131233128.G529@wolery.cumb.org>
On Mon, Jan 31, 2000 at 11:31:28PM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> Sometimes I wonder if we're really doing people a favor allowing them
> to use vendor makes, given how buggy they all seem to be...
I'd mostly been thinking of *bsd, to be honest.
> I think most recent makes have the $(var:x=y) substitution notation,
Good...
> I'm not so sure about $(indirect_$(var)).
This is the one that would most hurt, I think.
> They definitely don't all have an include capability, which is
> the thing I find myself missing most often.
This I don't mind so much. We don't have that many subdirectories
and inlining is still managable.
> You could make a first pass by moving all the logic in the subdir
> Makefile.in's into the Make-lang.in's - those get inlined into the top
> level Makefile, right?
Yep. The biggest problem that turned up there was that I found I
needed to use `-o' in the `.c.o' rule, which I know several vendor
compilers don't support. Not sure how I'd want to work around that.
r~