On Wednesday 02 June 2010 18:37, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 05:53:16AM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > >On Thursday 27 May 2010 14:46, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > >> This stuff is part of the make machinery, so implement it in make > >> proper. > >> Avoids spurious, slow re-generation of the generated Config.in and > >> Kbuild files. > > > >Well, our makefile machinery is complex and it tries so hard > >to not regenerate files that it itself is slow > >(but not too bad) and COMPLEX (which I personally > >see as a bigger problem wrt maintainability). > > > >The patch is perhaps conceptually right. But my tiny brain > >will have difficulty understanding and supporting > >all these horrible makefile constructs. Where "horrible" > >is not your fault, most makefiles end up looking like that. > > Don't get me wrong, but if you want it simple, please revert > _generating_ Config.in and Kbuild.
That change allows to edit three files when new applet is added instead of five. > If, OTOH, you want to generate them then _please_ let's do it right, > i.e. let's apply this patch. > > > >I propose keeping it as is for now. > > Let's please do it right instead or revert back to static > Config.in/Kbuild. > > TIA for your (re-)consideration and cheers, Our makefiles are horrifying as-is. I can agree to "do it right" in makefiles, but makefiles should be seriously simplified first. Otherwise, it's _me_ who will be left burdened with maintenance of even more horrifying makefiles. Maintenance nightmare trumps a small slowdown at build time. -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
