On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 07:25:55PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Wed, 13.08.08 11:54, Daniel Macks ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > For clarity and to simplify the makefile logic a bit, you might > > consider putting everything for the gtk lib into a separate subdir > > instead of lumped into src/ with the main lib. [...] > If I understood your proposal correctly you are suggesting adoption of > recursive make for building binaries and libs? > > I dislike recursive make with a passion, I consider it a feature if a > build system doesn't use recursive make. Also see "Recursive Make > Considered Harmful": > > http://miller.emu.id.au/pmiller/books/rmch/ > > For most of my newer projects I adopted some kind of hybrid scheme: > use recursive make for building docs and stuff seperately, but build > binaries from a single Makefile. And that's how I did it in > libcanberra, too. That avoids most of the problems you get by using > recursive make, but still keeps some things seperate.
Yup, using single Makefile is certainly a good idea in many cases, especially for something as simple as this lib set. Didn't know if there was a conscious plan here:) dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks _______________________________________________ libcanberra-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://tango.0pointer.de/mailman/listinfo/libcanberra-discuss
