makefile thoughts

Will Coleda will at coleda.com
Wed Dec 30 05:12:48 UTC 2009


On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Andy Dougherty <doughera at lafayette.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2009, Will Coleda wrote:
>
>> Because I am tired of fixing bugs with makefile deps, I'd like to do
>> some cleanup on our makefiles to make them easier to
>> process/validate/debug.
>
> Good luck with that!  It is rather complex now -- some directories
> have their own makefile while others do not.  There are also a number
> of little quirks which I've never been able to understand (e.g. MAKE vs
> MAKE_C) and for which the commit logs are singularly unhelpful.
>
>> * Do we currently support any versions of 'make' that don't support an
>> include directive of some kind? (gmake and nmake both seem to)
>
> Solaris make and dmake (distributed make) and OpenBSD make all support an
> include directive.
>
> --
>    Andy Dougherty              doughera at lafayette.edu
>

I've created a branch (one_make) to start cleaning up the makefile.
I've just now eliminated the compiler.dummy target there, and moved
several generated independent makefiles into include'd ones.

I've also broken out a few chunks of static deps into their own files.

Can I get some verification from some non-gmake builds?

Any suggestions on better names than Makefile.mak ?

-- 
Will "Coke" Coleda


More information about the parrot-dev mailing list