Re: [Gnucap-devel] testing

[al davis]

On Tuesday 10 February 2015, Felix Salfelder wrote:
> something is ready in autotools-make2-WIP.
> - ./configure creates Make2 files. one for each Makefile
>   (nothing else touches them)
> - contents of Make2 reflect configuration (currently some
> variables are set, one global template is used)
> - the settings are unnecessary but authoritative during
> build, in particular after edits.
> 
> next questions:
> - Make1 already exists. but also: autotools likes
> "Makefile.am" much better. how important is the file name?

The name is not important at all, but the idea is to keep Make1 
away from autotools, so it just linked at run time.  Just use it 
as is.  A while back I considered changing the name of Make1 to 
Makefile.am, but then ran into other issues.

Make1 is user serviceable, and should remain user serviceable 
after running configure.

The Make1,2,3 dates back to before make had include.  A better 
way to do it today is to call Make1 Makefile and have it include 
Make2, which in turn includes Make3, like I did for the spice 
model plugins.

> - there is no Make3, only Makefile.in. the Makefile is built
> from it. how does this matter?

Makefile.in is essentially the equivalent of Make3.  The names 
don't matter.


I went through some of this same thought process creating 
gnucap's plugin system.