Re: [vile] Debian package?

[Brendan O'Dea]

On 22 August 2011 08:52, Thomas Dickey <address@hidden> wrote:
> hmm.  As far as I know, $(name) and ${name} should work equally well
> in makefiles.  The reason that I've been using ${name} is that the
> same token will also work in shell scripts, which makes it simple(r)
> to do substitutions with autoconf.  Is there some reason (other than
> perhaps style) with that in a dpkg script?

debian/rules is just a makefile, so yes, $(name) and ${name} are equivalent.

The change in to ${prefix} in that diff is quite incidental, I just
happened to notice that it was being used inconsistently.

I tend to use $(name) for makefile variables, since it makes it
clearer that make should be doing the expansion rather than the shell.
 This is a particularly awful example:

  xshell = x-terminal-emulator -e $$(prefix)/share/vile/xshell.sh

the value of prefix is being passed here through debian/rules (hence
$$), via a quoted argument in build-xvile-stamp to make it through the
shell invoking make on vile's makefile, where it should finally be
expanded.

--bod