James Mills wrote:
On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:55:41PM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
Yakov Sudeikin wrote:
Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this
old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!
Not of you have hundred of files in a dozen
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:55:41PM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> > Yakov Sudeikin wrote:
> > >Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this
> > >old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!
> >
> > Not of you have hundred of files in a d
I've presented small improve in fcpmake, witch can modified all MAKE files
in FCP project, no one must use MAKE for own project but to recompile
COMPILATOR better use it and with my patch even simpler (I think so).
Darek
PS. I'm sorry for my last post in HTML format.
- Original Message
On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:55:41PM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote:
> Yakov Sudeikin wrote:
> >Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this
> >old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!
>
> Not of you have hundred of files in a dozens of dir
Yakov Sudeikin wrote:
Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this
old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!
Not of you have hundred of files in a dozens of directories and you want
to compile these source for more than one target.
_
> Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this
> old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs!
For simple things: yes, for more complicated stuff, make is quite ideal.
Even Borland's products all come with make.
___
fpc-deve
Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because
you do not need this old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you
need is a compiler!
Thanks
Yakov
