This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: proposal to fork the build-tools projects
- From: Bernd Jendrissek <berndj at prism dot co dot za>
- To: "Paul D. Smith" <psmith at gnu dot org>
- Cc: tromey at redhat dot com, Tom Lord <lord at regexps dot com>, Automake List <automake at gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:07:49 +0200
- Subject: Re: proposal to fork the build-tools projects
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210152108580.928-100000@localhost.localdomain> <200210162124.OAA03641@morrowfield.regexps.com> <87n0p99bhu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <200210210647.XAA25967@morrowfield.regexps.com> <200210210803.BAA26196@morrowfield.regexps.com> <87wuo74he6.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <p5wuo7qwn1.fsf@lemming.engeast.baynetworks.com>
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 06:50:42PM -0400, Paul D. Smith wrote:
> %% Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com> writes:
>
> Tom> If you do things right, your Makefiles don't need to contain
> Tom> specific filenames at all, and you don't need to edit any
> Tom> Makefiles as you add, delete, or rename files
>
> tom> Long-time automake readers already know I'm strongly against this
> tom> sort of structuring.
>
> I agree. Explicit lists of files are the way to go. Everywhere I've
> seen globbing used it's been much more hassle than it was worth.
That doesn't mean another autoconfiscation (automakefiscation?) tool
wouldn't be useful. Just like autoscan generates a skeleton configure.ac,
surely a tool that generates skeleton Makefile.am's would be useful?
bernd