Re: scripts/build/scan-mf-deps: script to generate MF dependencies (issue 553700043 by address@hidden)

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:44 PM <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2020/03/15 18:54:44, hanwenn wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 7:14 PM <mailto:address@hidden>
> wrote:
> > > > I very much agree with you, but out of the existing language
> within
> > > > our tree (Perl, Python, Shell, C++, Make), it is the least worst
> > > > option. Make is too limited (see the mess that our makefiles are
> > > > today), Shell has all the problems of Make. We can't use C++ in
> the
> > > > build system, and Perl is a godawful mess of line-noise.
> > > >
> > > > What do you suggest instead?
> > >
> > > Not doing this at all.
> > > In cases like this, I begin to question the very fundamental
> > > assumptions. In this case: Do we really need to dynamically generate
> the
> >
> > You didn't answer my question, but I realize it was imperfectly
> stated.
> >
> > My question is: what overall architecture do you propose for the build
> system?
>
> Using whatever makes sense from the GNU build system and reduce the
> maintenance burden of the build system as much as possible. FWIW I fully
> agree with David that the current shortcomings originate from what
> LilyPond builds around Autoconf, GNU make et al. Using standard
> solutions (aclocal, possibly Automake for dependencies of C++ files)
> should enable us to reuse what others have already solved.

I don't disagree with the analysis of the root cause, but getting rid
of the recursive make for a non-recursive one means a complete
rewrite, and not one that can be done incrementally. When you do a
complete rewrite, you might as well reconsider the fundamental
assumptions, one of which is "use the GNU build stack".

I have plenty of experience with Automake, GNU make, building
lilypond, and build systems in general. My conclusion of this
experience is that it is a pretty poor stack, and for that reason I am
experimenting with something that is completely different.

I have simplfied the change under review. I'm sure there is a sed
incantation that could achieve the same, but I don't want to bother
learning it. If you can suggest one, I'd be happy to use it.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen