On Wed, Jun 26, 2002 at 01:48:04AM +1000, Greg Banks wrote:
> Ok, why don't you and Peter Samuelson get together, create such a thing and
> we can compare it against kbuild2.5? If it's simple and a win, great!
The same reasons as so many other I belive:
I do not have the need, I do not have the time, so I do not bother doing it.
But I could return the question to you. If you thing this needs to be
done by kbuild - why not add it to kbuild.
The answer that it is already there in kbuild-2.5 I do not buy into.
Reasons for this is simple:
- kbuild-2.5 is not in main line
- kbuild-2.5 forces a new syntax for makefiles
- kbuild-2.5 adds a lot of complexity compared to Rules.make* as of today.
* Rules.make needs some commenting to explain the magic behind the
constructs. kbuild-2.5 does a good job commenting the src.
A big open question for me is still:
o What do I get from kbuild-2.5 that justify the added complexity?
-> Separate obj and src trees [Soon available in kbuild-2.4]
-> Shadow trees
-> Faster total build
-> Slower build of a single object when no specific syntax is used
NO_MAKEFILE_GEN
-> Better documentation, and more precise documentation
-> Anything else worth to mention?
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Jabber Inc.
Don't miss the IM event of the season | Special offer for OSDN members!
JabConf 2002, Aug. 20-22, Keystone, CO http://www.jabberconf.com/osdn
_______________________________________________
kbuild-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kbuild-devel
