> So I intent do write some script which creates Makefile's from > mkfile's and maybe even does some build-time configuration > (sort of ./configure ;-)). That script(s) could be packet along > with some other fundamental p9p build utils, and this package > then would be the very first in depedency chain. Taking cross- > builds into account, this would be an TOOL or HOST dependency, > since it runs on the building host, not the target - an compiler- > less target wouldn't ever need it (it plays in the same liga as > tools like lex, make, autoconf, etc). > > What do you think about this approach ?
aren't you skipping a step? how to modularize p9p is not an interesting question until one has decided that it worth doing. why is modularizing p9p a good idea? as you point out, the process creates a number of problems without adding any functionality. - erik
