[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: automake -vs- huge projects
From: |
Paul D. Smith |
Subject: |
Re: automake -vs- huge projects |
Date: |
16 Dec 2003 15:34:53 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 |
%% Bob Friesenhahn <address@hidden> writes:
bf> Per-subdirectory rules and definitions can be added in order to
bf> significantly reduce the amount of redundant code, and to
bf> re-enable the capability to usefully override parts of the default
bf> Makefile.in.
Not if you want to continue to generate portable makefiles.
There is no way in POSIX make (for example) to generate a target in a
subdirectory using a suffix rule.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <address@hidden> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://make.paulandlesley.org
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
- automake -vs- huge projects, Tom Tromey, 2003/12/16
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/12/16
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects,
Paul D. Smith <=
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/12/16
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/12/16
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Lars Hecking, 2003/12/17
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Paul D. Smith, 2003/12/17
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/12/17
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Norman Gray, 2003/12/17
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Ralf Corsepius, 2003/12/18
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/12/18
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Paul D. Smith, 2003/12/18
- Re: automake -vs- huge projects, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2003/12/18