Re: makefile skeletons?

[Nicola Pero]

> > > Where can GNUmakefile skeletons (for applications, tools, etc) be found?
> > 
> > Good question/suggestion.  We don't have an official (or unofficial, for
> > what matters) set of GNUmakefile skeletons.
> > 
> > I see two main uses for GNUmakefile skeletons - one as starting points.
> > In that case, probably minimal GNUmakefiles are best.
> 
> This seems like a good idea. Would make it easier to find something to
> copy&paste from. :)

Yes.  I think you captured perfectly the spirit. :-)

And this spirit would make them useful even if you had comprehensive and
detailed reference documentation - copy&paste is an excellent and
efficient shortcut for humans having to produce stuff quickly.

Still, there is a need for better documentation for gnustep-make - we'd
need a proper and complete Manual.  I'd love to fill this gap but I'm
afraid I won't be able to do it anytime soon (lack of time).  I think I
can have GNUmakefile skeletons completed reasonably quickly instead.


> > Shall we set up such sets ?  What about a new core/make/Examples/
> > subdirectory on CVS ?
> 
> Examples definitely don't belong in core/. All our other examples are
> (or should be :) in usr-apps/examples/. I'm not sure I'd call a minimal
> skeleton GNUmakefile an example, though.

Yes - examples is probably not a good name - you can consider them part of
the gnustep-make documentation.  They are not examples, as you can't
really compile them :-)

I suppose they could go with the other stuff in core/make/Documentation.  
Or maybe we could have core/make/Templates.