Re: simpler way to do multi-arch builds?

[Paul D. Smith]

%% "Robert P. J. Day" <address@hidden> writes:

  rpjd> when i first saw that approach, i thought it was a bit hacky as
  rpjd> well, but there's one feature about it i like and that is its
  rpjd> ability to be incorporated into a current build structure
  rpjd> without hacking that build structure.

  rpjd> i've already seen the other approach where rules are generated
  rpjd> in which all file references are prefixed with $(OUTPUTDIR) or
  rpjd> something like that and, even with the hackiness, i prefer the
  rpjd> first technique just because the makefiles still look familiar
  rpjd> to others.

If that's your goal then you're right... but in my experience very few
people know make syntax, and fewer are willing to learn.  If you don't
want to have to constantly review all code changes that involve
makefiles to be sure people aren't doing unutterably stupid things, you
need some kind of declarative, data driven approach to makefiles that
removes the need for 95% of developers to know anything about make
syntax.  Put another way, to my mind one of the primary ADVANTAGES of a
data driven makefile is that it DOESN'T look "familiar enough" to people
that they get an itch to start writing their own rules willy-nilly.

Even then, people do stupid things but at least this cuts it way down.


Obviously if you have an existing environment you're trying to retrofit
with a minimum of fuss, then you're right, this method does have
advantages.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://make.paulandlesley.org
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist