On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:17:08PM -0500, Wietse Venema wrote:
> > I don't see where "gmake" enters into the picture.
>
> Simplistically, I want to type "make" in a subdirectory and build
> code in the appropriate manner for the platform (dynamically-linked
> on platform X, statically-linked on platform Y).
Provided you are willing to run "makedefs" first, I see no obstacle
to splicing in the right definitions, so that the resulting (portable)
Makefile builds shared libraries on some systems and static libraries
on others.
We could have default settings that produce static compilation even
if you don't run "makedefs" first, but that would add a bit of complexity.
> Perhaps a concrete example no gmake/autobloat/libstool dependency)
> would help. The proposed option, freezes files and breaks nothing.
Yes, we could also have a Makefile.shared, this will require keeping
the files in sync, so I'd rather avoid that, even if the Makefile has
a bit of extra internal complexity.
--
Viktor.
