Re: [lmi] MAKEFLAGS

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:22:25 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

GC> On 3/9/21 2:28 PM, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
GC> [...]
GC> >  If we really want to discuss the makefiles (but I'm not sure if we do), a
GC> > more interesting question might be whether we really need a separate
GC> > workhorse.make at all. I did read the paper[1] which inspired this 
approach
GC> > but I happen to completely disagree with it
GC> 
GC> Reversing so fundamental a decision now would be a major undertaking,
GC> upon which I wouldn't want to embark because I don't believe the
GC> benefits could justify the cost.

 Yes, this is more or less what I expected, so I'll just continue using
"make local_options=--what-if=skeleton.cpp MAKEFLAGS=rRn skeleton.o"
instead of the normal make commands with lmi, when I have to use the
official makefiles.

 Perhaps it would be worth at least document all these idiosyncrasies
somewhere.

VZ

pgpUqnY2W2_Gb.pgp
Description: PGP signature