Re: DOCS: include a sample "Makefile"?

[John Mandereau]

Jonathan Kulp a écrit :
> BTW I now have working makefiles for a lilypond-book (LaTeX type) 
> project and for a symphony I've engraved with targets of "score," 
> "parts," "midi," and "all."  The parts are unsuitable for actual use 
> but they're sufficient to test the makefile and the build process.
[snip]
> I would welcome "best practice" advice on these. Once I'm satisfied 
> with how they work on Linux & Mac (and Windows if anyone wants to help 
> me with them), then I'll put generic filenames and dirnames to change 
> them into examples suitable for the documentation.
Make always invokes a new shell for each command line (except that you 
can split a shell command or commands sequence on several lines with 
'\'), so you don't need the 'cd ..'

Prefer '&&' over ';' as a command separator, except if you don't care 
whether the first command fails for the execution of the second command. 
In this case, if for some reason there is no 'out' directory, you will 
get a less explicit error than if the shell (and then make) would have 
returned an error "out: no such file or directory".

It might be good to separate commands for generating each intermediate 
formats, e.g. in case you define targets or variables that can enable 
different output format from the latex file (PDF, HTML with latex2html, 
...).

Best,
John

PS please attach or quote in the message future revisions of this 
makefile directly, so lazy hackers can grab and comment it more easily.