[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial re
From: |
wave++ |
Subject: |
Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release) |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:06:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
In local.unid.arch, you wrote:
>> - Relocated builds:
>> - Ability to avoid recursiviness:
>> - Ability to use standard make syntax:
>
> These are possible with Make, in my experience. Maybe easier with
> makepp, but it's hard to tell.
Of course, you can do *whatever* you want using make.
If you want to reduce the concept to "generic dag solver", you don't
need anything more than make.
>> - The ability to setup arbitrarily complex rules, through perl
>> expressions.
>
> This looks like a bug. Likewise building makedepend into the core.
Make isn't a simple DAG solver, anyway. You don't need to know about
files when solving a dag. But you are solving a DAG around your build
system.
How many passes can you remove in the process? Can you use dynamic rules
to do that without using a two-pass process? How complex is your build
system?
In fact, automake IS using Make!
> Oh well, whatever works for you. I'll probably go look again at jam.
> I'm not sure any has enough advantage to be worth the cost, as with
> others.
>
> Returning to the original point, most people on the list seem to
> appreciate that arch is an quantum leap on from CVS. It's not clear
> that any of the alternative build tools have made a similar size leap
> forwards from Make. They still try to solve essentially the same
> problem: construct a DAG and solve it.
Basically yes. I perfectly agree with you.
Like arch basically "constructs changesets and exchanges them".
Nothing that tar + diff --recursive + mail can't do :)
--
'(wave++ "Yuri D'Elia" "http://www.yuv.info/")
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Robert Collins, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Jan-Benedict Glaw, 2003/09/16
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Samium Gromoff, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/09/17
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Samium Gromoff, 2003/09/17
- autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), Sascha Silbe, 2003/09/18
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), wave++, 2003/09/18
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), MJ Ray, 2003/09/18
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), wave++, 2003/09/18
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), MJ Ray, 2003/09/18
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release),
wave++ <=
- Re: autoconf (was: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release), Andrew Suffield, 2003/09/18
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: autoconf, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/18
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/09/17
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Miles Bader, 2003/09/17
- [going OT] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Doran Moppert, 2003/09/18
- Re: [going OT] Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Miles Bader, 2003/09/18
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [going OT] Re: Re: [ANNOUNCE] tlator-0.1 initial release, Stig Brautaset, 2003/09/18
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [going OT] build tool design, was: tlator-0.1 initial release, MJ Ray, 2003/09/18
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [going OT] build tool design, was: tlator-0.1 initial release, Robin Farine, 2003/09/18
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: [going OT] build tool design, was: tlator-0.1 initial release, MJ Ray, 2003/09/18