On 8/3/06, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm about to commit a change to Compile to use type=<recipe_type>
> instead of is_<recipe_type>=yes.
I assume you have some facility for backwards-compatibility in there?
I assume the same, of course.
This is a big change wrt compatibility, but one I've been thinking
about for a long time now; thanks for bringing this up. Also, this
would imply in incrementing at least the middle number of the Compile
version.
To minimize incompatibility between the boxes of those tracking CVS
and those who aren't, we'd better make a release right not long after
committing this change. Does the rest of Compile and Scripts look
stable enough for a release now? (recent changes on the dependencies
scheme come to mind.)
Other thoughts: in the process of deprecating the is_ variables,
MakeRecipe should be changed as well, and maybe even NewVersion could
fix recipes for transitioning to the new style. RecipeLint needs to
add WARN clauses for uses of the "old style".
> Before I commit I have some questions. The variable name; as it is
> inside the recipe, "type" should be clear enough, but as the word
> "type" is a reserved word, it can be used as a variable but I don't
> like it, maybe "is_type" or "recipe_type" is better?
My vote would be for recipe_type. It's less ambiguous, and won't get
highlighted by vim :)
recipe_type as well.
> When I'm at it, why is one type called "compileprogram" and not
> "autoconf" or "configure", which is, imo, more natural.
Historical reasons that do not apply anymore.
That's a really good question. Unless someone has an objection, I
also vote for
recipe_type=autoconf
I don't have a definite vote for this, but I'd be leaning between
autoconf or autotools.
-- Hisham
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
