Greg Troxel writes:
If GNU make is required it needs to be documented.
I've added a comment into Makefile as a stopgap measure.
Separately from that, the makefiles look much more complicated than I
would have thought necessary, and if there aren't good reasons to
require more than POSIX
Greg Troxel writes:
and it seems recent changes have required beyond-POSIX-make features.
GNU make is (and actually always was) required for the Makefile to fully
work.
This seems unfortunate; I don't understand why building org has to be so
complicated. If it is complicated, it seems best
Achim Gratz strom...@nexgo.de writes:
At the very start of my Makefile branch I stated that I will use GNU
make since the old make file already used some GNU make features. This
will be documented when it gets released.
FWIW, Achim's work on the makefile will be part of Org 7.9, expected to
I don't really object to using GNU make; enough things require it
(probably emacs does too) that it's already installed. It's more that
anyone using a makefile will use gnu make isn't a valid assumption,
especially when the documentation says type make.
At the very start of my Makefile branch
Greg Troxel writes:
I don't really object to using GNU make; enough things require it
(probably emacs does too) that it's already installed. It's more that
anyone using a makefile will use gnu make isn't a valid assumption,
especially when the documentation says type make.
[...]
Could you
Achim Gratz strom...@nexgo.de writes:
Could you please state clearly what you want to have changed and
possibly how? You keep wandering back and forth in your arguments, but
What I meant was:
If GNU make is required it needs to be documented.
Separately from that, the makefiles look
Hi Greg,
Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com writes:
For a long time, I've been updating org from git every week or two via:
update-org () {
(cd $HOME/SOFTWARE/EMACS/org-mode git pull make)
}
and I have emacs pointed at that directory. This is on NetBSD where
make is BSD make.
