On Thursday 05 July 2007, Nix wrote: > On 5 Jul 2007, Mike Frysinger outgrape: > > On Thursday 05 July 2007, Bodo Eggert wrote: > >> The Makefiles generated by autotools is a huge mess, if autotools got it > >> wrong (again!), fixing them requires editing a lot of files. > > > > this looks like a no brainer to me: dont edit generated files > > There is a worthwhile point here: if your input to the makefile > generator is buggy and make errors out, you'll have to look at the > generated code in order to relate the make error to the original. granted, this can be a pain (ive spent an annoying amount of time tracking down unbalanced quotes/parens/etc... by trying to correlate configure.ac with configure), but i dont feel like this is a autotool-specific issue as it can come up with other auto-build-generators as well. heck, a minor typo in a hand written makefile can sometimes be a time sink and hard to trace back (just look at linux kernel makefiles). -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- References:
- Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1
- From: Mike Frysinger <[email protected]>
- Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1
- From: Nix <[email protected]>
- Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1
- Prev by Date: Re: [-mm Patch] INFINIBAND: check the return value of kmalloc
- Next by Date: SATA exceptions
- Previous by thread: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1
- Next by thread: Re: [ANNOUNCE] util-linux-ng 2.13-rc1
- Index(es):
 |