Re: [Gnu-arch-users] configs?

[Dustin Sallings]

On Friday, Sep 26, 2003, at 01:27 US/Pacific, Robert Anderson wrote:

> On Fri, 2003-09-26 at 00:35, Dustin Sallings wrote:
> >         Is there a reason configs are required to be in the ``configs''
> > directory?  It seems like any file in that format should be 
> > sufficient.
> >
> >         In fact, is there a benefit to having a more than one per project?
>
> Consider a fairly generic set of Makefiles useful for building more 
> than
> one project.  You'd want configs for each project that that set of
> Makefiles can build.  As one example.

	I'm not sure I follow this example.  Are you suggesting having a 
project that is made up of Makefiles and references other projects that 
those makefiles can build?  Either I'm not understanding that (which is 
likely since I haven't slept nearly enough this week) or it seems a 
little contrived.

	The way I imagine this stuff being most used is in a project that 
makes use of a library type project.  I've got a C-based application 
that pulls in a couple other C-based projects, for example.  I don't 
see why I'd need to have more than one set of configs in a single 
branch pulling in different sets of sub-projects.  Shouldn't a single 
sub-project set definition be adequate for any given branch of a 
project?

--
SPY                      My girlfriend asked me which one I like better.
pub  1024/3CAE01D5 1994/11/03 Dustin Sallings <address@hidden>
|    Key fingerprint =  87 02 57 08 02 D0 DA D6  C8 0F 3E 65 51 98 D8 BE
L_______________________ I hope the answer won't upset her. ____________