-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > > What do you think of idea of making everything explicit (that means, > > no implicit variable settings at all)? > > I would not be happy about this. Until bug 246061 dpkg-cross uses the > default approach and suite most of Makefiles. Changing that would lead > to a extensive configuration process not required today.
Why? Default configuration file will provide the same values that are currently hardcoded into dpkg-cross, so ease of usage will not suffer. We may even implement "include" statement for config file, and split such "base" setting into a separate file. By the way, user-provided config file will not replace system config file in this case, but will just be included from there. But we will get great advantages: - - it will be 100% clear what variables are being set, and what values they get. No longer (citing your message) "nobudy really know which ones are defined". - - dpkg-cross code itself will become cleaner. I just tried to implement 'unset' feature, and disliked the result. I really want to unify variable setting first. I probably will try to do that, and show you the result (without committing anything). I hope you'll like it :). Nikita -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBAA7esTbPknTfAB4RAnzPAJ4vgK5+VxGeTPaevgimMAbo4RMQkwCePOuW s6ImNr9StDqa3AF+SJwMfZY= =I9Hb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
