From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 28 07:19:39 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AEE7397E; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 07:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7134B683; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 07:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nine.des.no (smtp.des.no [194.63.250.102]) by smtp-int.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65DC34437; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 07:19:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by nine.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 96B7C6ED; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:18:44 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: Garrett Cooper Subject: Re: svn commit: r277737 - in head: etc/pam.d tools/build/mk References: <201501260850.t0Q8oDna015719@svn.freebsd.org> <86fvax91cy.fsf@nine.des.no> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:18:44 +0100 Message-ID: <86vbjrl6ej.fsf@nine.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers , Garrett Cooper X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 07:19:39 -0000 Garrett Cooper writes: > I disagree for a few reasons: > 1. style.Makefile(9) makes no mention of having to use an idiom over > the other. That is only one of many things it does not mention. That doesn't mean we don't have idioms and conventions outside what is described in that document. > 2. The likelihood of typos creeping into Makefiles is greater with the > _foo=3D idiom. I don't see how it makes a difference at all. > 3. It creates unnecessary local variables =E2=80=94 especially when appen= ding > is so easy to do. Define unnecessary. What is the marginal cost of a Makefile variable? > 4. It=E2=80=99s more difficult when backporting changes to do it with the > variable method =E2=80=94 especially if context around the line modified = has > changed a great deal. I don't see how it makes a difference. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no