I don’t know why a second build process that only builds what is needed for ksh can not be added to the existing source tree. I don’t think checking out unneeded code is as much of a burden as having multiple places to bug patch is. I’m already in the process of patching a few bugs I’ve found in codex/vcodex and realized there is duplicate code there which I need to merge. Having multiple branches will just make keeping in sync that much worse.
ASE From: <ast-developers-boun...@lists.research.att.com> on behalf of Jeff Frontz <jeff.fro...@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 10:44 AM To: "ast-developers@lists.research.att.com" <ast-developers@lists.research.att.com> Subject: Re: [ast-developers] building ksh93 on macOS using clang/LLVM From: Eleftherios Koutsofios <e...@research.att.com<mailto:e...@research.att.com>> if the plan is to reduce this repo to just enough to build ksh93, I think it should be moved to a separate repo, since this is supposed to be all of AST. I don't know if anyone still uses the whole thing but I'd rather keep it whole. I resonate with Elefteris's sentiment -- in addition to ksh, I still use the AST version of nmake (and whatever other AST tools/libraries nmake implicitly uses). Jeff
_______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list ast-developers@lists.research.att.com http://lists.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
