Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:34:39 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@chuckr.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: two make questions Message-ID: <20020924063439.GJ30361@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> In-Reply-To: <20020923130006.N332-100000@april.chuckr.org> References: <20020923143523.GA30361@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20020923130006.N332-100000@april.chuckr.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# chuckr@chuckr.org / 2002-09-23 13:08:04 -0400:
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > Now, saying "don't do it" is nice, but I'd like to know why.
> > Why doesn't this work? Also, what documentation (besides the
> > source) is there that covers variable scopes? See the second
> > message for the problem description.
>
> Wish I could give you some satisfaction .... because "I've been there,
> done that". Unfortunately, you aren't going to find it. If you
> decide that the only thing that you can do is fix the docs, you won't
> even succeed there, because it will only raise a huge volume of
> complaints (seemingly endless nitpickers) all giving their own take on
> it, even though they won't fix it themselves.
quite common. :|
i think i might even try it some day, provided my better
understanding of make i hope to gain won't cause me to lose
motivation.
> The only book there is on make is pretty pissed-poor, the make book
> from O'Reilly. I've been considering writing a book on the 3 main
> flavors of make for a while now .... I'm not convinced yet that
> there's a market for it. I'm pretty sure now, with all the horrible
> make projects I've undertaken, I could do it.
i say go for it. :)
> The odd behavior of variables is only one item from a whole list of
> them. Go take a look at what use: means, if you want a headache. Or,
> how about the behavior of "include", which *does* work, even though
> the man page says that only ".include" will work ("include" is
> compatible with both BSD make and GNU make, an important point.)
can't this be fixed? i mean, perfect wording is important, but
complete coverage of features is even more, even if not spelled out
in the best way, no? :)
> When you don't have any problem with a file like bsd.port.mk, then
> you'll be able to claim to know make.
yeah, figured that much.
the post to hackers@ has really paid off, i already learnt quite a
few things about make.
--
begin 666 nonexistent.vbs
FreeBSD 4.7-RC
8:21AM up 6 days, 15:36, 29 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.02, 0.00
end
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020924063439.GJ30361>