On Friday, October 31, 2014 7:21:12 AM UTC-7, Freddie Chopin wrote: > I assume that variants have basically these features: > - they are built into separate directory, > - each variant has it's own tup.config, > - there may be multiple variants at the same time. >
I agree. Also Tup already has all three of these features. Just create a new variant output directory alongside the .tup directory, drop in a tup.config file, rinse and repeat. Multiple variants, each with a unique tup.config file, and all present at the same time. And by issuing the tup command in the top directory, with the variant directory as an argument, you can build/rebuild just one variant at a time (most of the time, development is done in one variant, no point in rebuilding all of them if you don't need to). So I like all of this. My problem is that it doesn't work. I work on a 64-bit Windows machine, and two bugs are preventing me from adopting Tup for my project (a very large, high profile one). My proposed change to variants preserves the three features above, but avoids the need to interact with the OS. Honestly, I don't care how it gets fixed, I just need it fixed. It is reasonable to assume that since 64-bit Windows has been bugged for over 2 years, it isn't going to get fixed? :( --Ben R. -- -- tup-users mailing list email: [email protected] unsubscribe: [email protected] options: http://groups.google.com/group/tup-users?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tup-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
