Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #172151 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-08-13 14:53 +0100 |
| Last post | 2023-08-29 04:43 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 306 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-13 14:53 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-13 21:45 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-13 23:43 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-14 01:16 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-14 00:46 +0000
Re: Build Systems gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-14 01:05 +0000
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-13 18:59 -0700
Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-14 02:44 +0000
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-13 20:53 -0700
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) Matthew Ernisse <matt@going-flying.com> - 2023-08-17 22:00 +0000
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 03:51 -0700
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 04:58 -0700
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) Matthew Ernisse <matt@going-flying.com> - 2023-08-18 13:02 +0000
Re: Dev on Windoze Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-08-20 16:14 +0300
Re: Dev on Windoze "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 11:05 -0700
Re: Dev on Windoze (Was: Build Systems) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:16 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-14 04:03 +0000
Re: Build Systems gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-14 10:14 +0000
Re: Build Systems Karl Meyer <karlmeyer25@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 05:16 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-14 10:35 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-14 15:06 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-14 14:58 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-14 15:49 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-14 18:00 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 11:00 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 11:40 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 15:21 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 16:11 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-15 15:39 +0000
Re: Build Systems MJ OS_EXAMINE <m6502x64@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 08:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-15 16:44 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 20:00 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 18:03 +0200
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-15 17:01 +0000
Re: Build Systems gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-15 17:07 +0000
Re: Build Systems Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-08-15 23:17 +0300
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 22:57 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 18:49 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 13:13 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 23:09 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 23:36 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 15:55 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 01:05 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-16 01:39 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 11:37 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 12:15 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 15:16 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 16:34 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 18:07 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-16 17:43 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 18:51 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-16 21:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 22:25 +0100
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 00:15 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 01:02 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-17 02:56 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 11:21 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-17 21:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 23:40 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-19 00:43 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 15:45 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-18 00:24 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 17:46 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 18:29 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 19:13 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 14:55 +0200
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 14:34 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 14:34 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 15:19 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 15:43 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-19 13:19 +0200
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 20:56 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 20:57 -0700
Re: Build Systems "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2023-08-27 00:01 -0700
Re: Build Systems candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet (candycane) - 2023-08-27 03:34 +1300
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-27 08:32 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-27 16:58 +0200
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-27 11:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-27 16:52 +0200
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-27 11:59 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-18 01:49 +0000
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 02:19 -0700
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-19 01:21 +0100
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 18:36 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-19 13:51 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 05:35 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 00:35 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 09:54 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 12:30 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 13:44 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 17:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 02:28 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 00:12 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 11:13 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 11:36 +0100
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 13:37 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 13:51 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 14:51 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 17:19 +0100
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 09:30 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 17:51 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 16:36 +0000
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 16:50 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 18:06 +0100
Re: Build Systems kalevi@kolttonen.fi (Kalevi Kolttonen) - 2023-08-22 20:46 +0000
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 12:47 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 21:06 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-22 17:04 +0000
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-20 00:10 +0100
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 17:50 -0700
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-20 20:48 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-20 22:07 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-21 00:51 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 01:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 02:02 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 02:07 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-21 03:13 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 11:09 +0100
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 13:12 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 14:12 +0100
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:47 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 19:06 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-21 18:40 +0000
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:39 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 12:23 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 21:55 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-22 01:31 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 02:18 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 14:41 +0000
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 08:03 -0700
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 15:33 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 16:20 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-22 15:40 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 17:03 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-23 03:18 +0100
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 19:51 -0700
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-25 02:23 +0100
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 21:24 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-25 11:31 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-25 10:53 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-25 13:55 +0200
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-25 13:54 +0000
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-25 20:55 +0100
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 20:49 -0700
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 08:42 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-23 11:37 +0100
Re: Build Systems Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-23 14:02 +0300
Re: Build Systems Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 15:02 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-25 02:17 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-23 14:28 +0100
Re: Build Systems Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-23 19:54 +0300
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-23 19:33 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-23 21:13 +0100
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-23 23:09 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-24 15:32 +0200
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-24 15:51 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-24 18:58 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-24 18:29 +0000
Re: Build Systems vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2023-08-24 20:41 +0000
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-24 23:08 +0000
Re: Build Systems Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2023-08-25 17:22 +0100
Re: Build Systems Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 16:39 +0000
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-25 16:54 +0000
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-25 17:02 +0000
Re: Build Systems Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net> - 2023-08-25 19:21 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-25 18:56 +0000
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 11:44 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-24 18:47 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-24 21:20 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-24 22:59 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-25 02:18 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 20:17 -0700
Re: Build Systems Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-24 16:30 +0300
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-23 17:43 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-23 20:15 +0100
Re: Build Systems Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-26 18:19 +0300
Re: Build Systems Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-08-26 21:47 -0700
Re: Build Systems Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-28 11:31 +0300
Re: Build Systems Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-08-28 06:48 -0700
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-25 02:11 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-25 11:27 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-25 13:52 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-25 15:40 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-25 20:04 +0200
Re: Build Systems candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet (candycane) - 2023-08-26 00:47 +1300
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-25 21:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-26 01:42 +0100
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-27 01:16 +0100
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-25 05:51 +0000
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 23:17 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-21 02:52 +0000
Re: Build Systems vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2023-08-21 03:02 +0000
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-21 06:05 +0000
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-21 11:32 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-19 14:42 +0000
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 08:09 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-19 15:59 +0000
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 09:38 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-19 18:16 +0000
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-19 21:02 +0000
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 14:13 -0700
Re: Build Systems Ike Naar <ike@sdf.org> - 2023-08-19 19:10 +0000
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-19 21:00 +0000
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 14:22 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 17:56 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 18:13 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-20 14:13 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 06:05 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-20 16:15 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:25 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 13:35 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-21 14:43 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 05:52 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 14:30 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 15:18 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 23:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 16:11 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 14:47 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-21 23:20 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-21 15:45 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-22 00:57 +0100
Re: Build Systems vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2023-08-20 14:24 +0000
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 09:09 -0700
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-20 17:28 +0000
Re: Build Systems Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-19 20:26 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 14:50 +0200
Re: Build Systems Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2023-08-18 13:19 +0000
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 17:16 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 17:24 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 15:32 +0200
Re: Build Systems Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-18 07:22 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 07:48 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 17:11 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 08:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 16:32 -0700
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 04:02 -0700
Re: Build Systems "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2023-08-22 12:26 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-19 13:56 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 05:43 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 11:23 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 02:34 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 12:52 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 03:56 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 13:23 +0200
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 12:55 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 15:52 +0200
Re: Build Systems Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-17 02:14 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 15:56 +0200
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-17 16:01 +0000
Re: Build Systems Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-17 09:07 -0700
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-17 16:20 +0000
Re: Build Systems Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-17 09:31 -0700
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-17 17:24 +0000
Re: Build Systems Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-08-19 14:06 +0300
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 04:39 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-19 16:46 +0200
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-19 16:00 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-20 14:15 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 07:25 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-20 18:03 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-17 19:51 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 16:44 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 08:21 -0700
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-18 15:39 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-18 17:47 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-18 10:49 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-19 15:16 +0200
Re: Build Systems bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> - 2023-08-19 07:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-19 09:05 -0700
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:48 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 21:36 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 21:43 +0100
Re: Build Systems Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 14:07 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 12:46 +0200
Really? (Was: Build Systems) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2023-08-15 13:15 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 09:54 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 11:07 +0100
Re: Build Systems Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 03:42 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 12:14 +0100
Re: Build Systems Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 05:53 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 15:57 +0100
Re: Build Systems Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 09:10 -0700
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-14 14:49 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-14 14:39 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 11:08 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 02:56 -0700
Re: Build Systems Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 03:23 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 11:45 +0100
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 03:53 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-15 13:15 +0100
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:22 -0700
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 01:20 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 12:57 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 12:19 +0100
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 15:18 +0200
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 18:12 +0100
Re: Build Systems Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 18:18 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-16 17:45 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 15:30 +0200
Re: Build Systems Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:58 -0700
Re: Build Systems Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-15 14:06 +0000
Re: Build Systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-15 17:08 +0200
Re: Build Systems Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-15 21:46 +0100
Re: Build Systems scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-14 15:48 +0000
Re: Build Systems Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:16 -0700
Re: Build Systems Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-29 04:43 -0700
Page 4 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 16 Next page →
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-17 15:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ubl89c$3prfv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172388 |
On 16/08/2023 19:07, Bart wrote: > On 16/08/2023 14:16, David Brown wrote: > > Tell me what you see as the advantage here, and why /you/ think it would > > be a jolly good idea, and maybe I'll agree. But you have to say why it > > would be better for everyone, not just for you personally - you need > > good reasons to change 50 year old conventions. > > [Giving names to makefiles] > > * You can have more than one project in the same folder Makefiles can have multiple targets - that is, in fact, very common. But usually it's a bad idea to have multiple different projects in the same folder. > > * You can have different configurations of the same project I do that all the time with a single makefile. > > * You can have different makefiles customised to different compilers > (Seed7 has nearly 20 different makefiles) You can do that with a single makefile. > > * You can split up a project into components with their own separately > invoked makefile You can do that with a single main makefile, and invoke submakes with different makefiles if you like. Typically, these components and their makefiles are in different subdirectories. > > * You can differentiate between a makefile that is called directly, > and one that is called indirectly from another Call the main one "makefile", and the other one "other_bit.mak" - this is fine and perfectly normal. > > * If you expected to build X according to the build instructions, > but the makefile is called Y, then you know something may be wrong So making things more difficult for the user, flouting decades-old conventions and expectations, is a good thing in your eyes? > > 'make' must be unique in being an application that takes input from a > file, but the name of the file is hardcoded. The /default/ file name is hardcoded (well, both "makefile" and "Makefile" are supported). But as I mentioned before, if you want a different name just use "make -f other_file_name". (Use a file extension of your choice, if you want - make does not care.) > > A few applications will use defaults when a filename is missing (even if > it's 'stdin'), but are generally used with a specific name. > For some programs it is common practice - such as for "make". And also, I believe, for "CMake", "ant", "bake", "nmake", and all other build tools I have seen. Basically, people building a project find it really easy to go to the project directory and type "make" (or whatever). Typing "make -f project_name.mk" would be an unnecessary inconvenience. But of course you are free to do that if you want. > I would actually make a missing filename an error for an application > like this. > > Maybe make was written by the same person who hardcoded a.out as an > output filename. They missing a trick by not having a.c as the default > input for a C compiler; that makes as much sense. > I think you should get some experience with project organisation and build tools - then you will understand better. Otherwise, just accept that the way these things are done by other people makes a lot of sense to everyone else.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 00:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ubma81$3upnp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172451 |
On 17/08/2023 14:45, David Brown wrote: > On 16/08/2023 19:07, Bart wrote: >> On 16/08/2023 14:16, David Brown wrote: >> > Tell me what you see as the advantage here, and why /you/ think it >> would >> > be a jolly good idea, and maybe I'll agree. But you have to say >> why it >> > would be better for everyone, not just for you personally - you need >> > good reasons to change 50 year old conventions. >> >> [Giving names to makefiles] >> >> * You can have more than one project in the same folder > > Makefiles can have multiple targets - that is, in fact, very common. But > usually it's a bad idea to have multiple different projects in the same > folder. > >> >> * You can have different configurations of the same project > > I do that all the time with a single makefile. > >> >> * You can have different makefiles customised to different compilers >> (Seed7 has nearly 20 different makefiles) > > You can do that with a single makefile. Yes, you can do quite a lot with a single, large, elaborate file. But sometimes it's better to have several simpler, dedicated files. But this sounds familiar: wasn't it you castigating me in the past for distributing software as a single C file? You got the incorrect idea that that was how I developed the software (as a single 40,000-line module). It sounds a lot like double standards: when I use a single file, even though it has its own name that must be submitted to the tool, it's bad. But when makefiles do it, it's good! And they're all allowed to have the same name no matter what the project. A bit like the Lua product in my other post. When I make a 300KB self-contained language, it's bad, it's pointless, it's rubbish, it's a toy. When Lua does the same thing, then what a great product! > Call the main one "makefile", and the other one "other_bit.mak" - this > is fine and perfectly normal. In the Lua project, the two files were called 'makefile'. I suspect that if 'make' required an explicit name, they would not both be called 'makefile'. >> >> * If you expected to build X according to the build instructions, >> but the makefile is called Y, then you know something may be wrong > > So making things more difficult for the user, flouting decades-old > conventions and expectations, is a good thing in your eyes? What, needing one extra parameter? Typing two words instead of one? This is what you call being more difficult? > For some programs it is common practice - such as for "make". And also, > I believe, for "CMake", "ant", "bake", "nmake", and all other build > tools I have seen. Basically, people building a project find it really > easy to go to the project directory and type "make" (or whatever). > Typing "make -f project_name.mk" would be an unnecessary inconvenience. > But of course you are free to do that if you want. I'm not used to seeing major, industrial-grade software being so sloppy. Imagine if two distinct makefiles somehow get mixed up. Type 'make', and it will use the wrong makefile. Maybe it will go obviously wrong, maybe not. > I think you should get some experience with project organisation and > build tools - then you will understand better. Otherwise, just accept > that the way these things are done by other people makes a lot of sense > to everyone else. Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared about having to type it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-17 17:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <878ra9jhxh.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #172482 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> In the Lua project, the two files were called 'makefile'. I suspect
> that if 'make' required an explicit name, they would not both be
> called 'makefile'.
In the tarball distributed from lua.org, the two files are called
"Makefile" and "src/Makefile". (The git repo and the "release"
files available on GitHub are organized differently, as I've already
explained to you. You have no reason to care about those unless
you plan to work on Lua development. I will not discuss them
further here.)
[...]
> What, needing one extra parameter? Typing two words instead of one?
> This is what you call being more difficult?
The file name Makefile implies that it's a file to be used by the make
tool to build one or more artifacts *from the contents of the directory
containing the Makefile*.
Typing "make" is typically one of the steps used to build a software
package from source and install it. Not having a default makefile name
would mean figuring out what name the maintainer chose and then typing
"make arbitrary-file-name".
Most developers organize their directories in a way that works well with
this. If you prefer to use some different organization, well, the "-f"
option is there for you. Nobody's telling you not to use it.
[...]
> I'm not used to seeing major, industrial-grade software being so sloppy.
It's not sloppy. It's optimized for the vastly more common use case.
> Imagine if two distinct makefiles somehow get mixed up. Type 'make',
> and it will use the wrong makefile. Maybe it will go obviously wrong,
So don't do that.
[...]
> Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the
> start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared
> about having to type it?
Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the
author chose? Yes.
The vast majority of the time, there is one Makefile in a directory, and
you just "cd" to that directory and type "make", possibly with some
argument(s) to provide more information. That's why having a default
name is a good thing. And you don't have to use the default if you
don't want to. (There's a common convention to use a ".mk" suffix for
non-default makefiles.)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-17 18:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f4eb70c3-f687-4ce4-b4ad-343566d46565n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #172483 |
On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 01:47:11 UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote: > Bart <b...@freeuk.com> writes: > [...] > > In the Lua project, the two files were called 'makefile'. I suspect > > that if 'make' required an explicit name, they would not both be > > called 'makefile'. > In the tarball distributed from lua.org, the two files are called > "Makefile" and "src/Makefile". (The git repo and the "release" > files available on GitHub are organized differently, as I've already > explained to you. You have no reason to care about those unless > you plan to work on Lua development. I will not discuss them > further here.) > > [...] > > What, needing one extra parameter? Typing two words instead of one? > > This is what you call being more difficult? > The file name Makefile implies that it's a file to be used by the make > tool to build one or more artifacts *from the contents of the directory > containing the Makefile*. > > Typing "make" is typically one of the steps used to build a software > package from source and install it. Not having a default makefile name > would mean figuring out what name the maintainer chose and then typing > "make arbitrary-file-name". > > Most developers organize their directories in a way that works well with > this. If you prefer to use some different organization, well, the "-f" > option is there for you. Nobody's telling you not to use it. > > [...] > > I'm not used to seeing major, industrial-grade software being so sloppy. > It's not sloppy. It's optimized for the vastly more common use case. > > Imagine if two distinct makefiles somehow get mixed up. Type 'make', > > and it will use the wrong makefile. Maybe it will go obviously wrong, > So don't do that. OK. I won't make any inadvertent mistakes. Got it! > [...] > > Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the > > start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared > > about having to type it? > Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the > author chose? Yes. Yeah. Figuring out what the executable is called in order to run it afterwards must be a problem too. Or maybe it's just a.out every time, of course! Honestly these are ridiculous excuses.The quibble you have is that when you type the name of a program that has a big and important task to do, and usually do that just once, that you have to tell it the name of a file? However do you manage to run even a text editor?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-17 19:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <874jkxjdwt.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #172484 |
bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> writes:
> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 01:47:11 UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote:
[...]
>> [...]
>> > Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the
>> > start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared
>> > about having to type it?
>> Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the
>> author chose? Yes.
>
> Yeah. Figuring out what the executable is called in order to run it
> afterwards must be a problem too.
Executables have to have unique names. Makefiles don't.
[...]
> Honestly these are ridiculous excuses.The quibble you have is that
> when you type the name of a program that has a big and important task
> to do, and usually do that just once, that you have to tell it the
> name of a file?
I'm not making excuses. I'm offering explanations.
Those of us who actually use, and sometimes create, Makefiles rarely
have any reason to name them something other than "Makefile". Do you
not understand that? Do you think we're all lying about it? Why would
we bother?
The make command already has an option to use a name other than than
"Makefile". You apparently advocate making it mandatory, which would
require uncounted users to alter the way they work. What exactly would
be the advantage of that?
Do you want to put files for all your projects in a single directory,
with a distinct makefile for each? You can do that.
> However do you manage to run even a text editor?
Be serious.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 14:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ubnpol$8t88$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172486 |
On 18/08/2023 04:13, Keith Thompson wrote: > bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> writes: >> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 01:47:11 UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote: > [...] >>> [...] >>>> Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the >>>> start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared >>>> about having to type it? >>> Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the >>> author chose? Yes. >> >> Yeah. Figuring out what the executable is called in order to run it >> afterwards must be a problem too. > > Executables have to have unique names. Makefiles don't. > > [...] > >> Honestly these are ridiculous excuses.The quibble you have is that >> when you type the name of a program that has a big and important task >> to do, and usually do that just once, that you have to tell it the >> name of a file? > > I'm not making excuses. I'm offering explanations. > > Those of us who actually use, and sometimes create, Makefiles rarely > have any reason to name them something other than "Makefile". Do you > not understand that? Do you think we're all lying about it? Why would > we bother? > > The make command already has an option to use a name other than than > "Makefile". You apparently advocate making it mandatory, which would > require uncounted users to alter the way they work. What exactly would > be the advantage of that? Note that it is very simple to make it mandatory for any given project (or jumble of projects thrown together in one directory) - simply do not have a makefile called "makefile" (or "Makefile"), and have a selection of different ".mk" files instead. So if Bart wants that, "make" already supports it. > > Do you want to put files for all your projects in a single directory, > with a distinct makefile for each? You can do that. > >> However do you manage to run even a text editor? > > Be serious. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 14:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <uboo4c$d11h$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172493 |
On 8/18/2023 5:55 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 18/08/2023 04:13, Keith Thompson wrote: >> bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> writes: >>> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 01:47:11 UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote: >> [...] >>>> [...] >>>>> Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the >>>>> start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have cared >>>>> about having to type it? >>>> Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the >>>> author chose? Yes. >>> >>> Yeah. Figuring out what the executable is called in order to run it >>> afterwards must be a problem too. >> >> Executables have to have unique names. Makefiles don't. >> >> [...] >> >>> Honestly these are ridiculous excuses.The quibble you have is that >>> when you type the name of a program that has a big and important task >>> to do, and usually do that just once, that you have to tell it the >>> name of a file? >> >> I'm not making excuses. I'm offering explanations. >> >> Those of us who actually use, and sometimes create, Makefiles rarely >> have any reason to name them something other than "Makefile". Do you >> not understand that? Do you think we're all lying about it? Why would >> we bother? >> >> The make command already has an option to use a name other than than >> "Makefile". You apparently advocate making it mandatory, which would >> require uncounted users to alter the way they work. What exactly would >> be the advantage of that? > > Note that it is very simple to make it mandatory for any given project > (or jumble of projects thrown together in one directory) - simply do not > have a makefile called "makefile" (or "Makefile"), and have a selection > of different ".mk" files instead. So if Bart wants that, "make" already > supports it. > >> >> Do you want to put files for all your projects in a single directory, >> with a distinct makefile for each? You can do that. >> >>> However do you manage to run even a text editor? >> >> Be serious. >> > Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 14:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <uboo61$d11h$5@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172507 |
On 8/18/2023 2:34 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 8/18/2023 5:55 AM, David Brown wrote: >> On 18/08/2023 04:13, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> bart c <bart4858@gmail.com> writes: >>>> On Friday, 18 August 2023 at 01:47:11 UTC+1, Keith Thompson wrote: >>> [...] >>>>> [...] >>>>>> Answer honestly: if 'make' had required an explicit filename from the >>>>>> start (probably it wouldn't have needed '-f'), would anyone have >>>>>> cared >>>>>> about having to type it? >>>>> Having to type it? No. Having to figure out what arbitrary name the >>>>> author chose? Yes. >>>> >>>> Yeah. Figuring out what the executable is called in order to run it >>>> afterwards must be a problem too. >>> >>> Executables have to have unique names. Makefiles don't. >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> Honestly these are ridiculous excuses.The quibble you have is that >>>> when you type the name of a program that has a big and important task >>>> to do, and usually do that just once, that you have to tell it the >>>> name of a file? >>> >>> I'm not making excuses. I'm offering explanations. >>> >>> Those of us who actually use, and sometimes create, Makefiles rarely >>> have any reason to name them something other than "Makefile". Do you >>> not understand that? Do you think we're all lying about it? Why would >>> we bother? >>> >>> The make command already has an option to use a name other than than >>> "Makefile". You apparently advocate making it mandatory, which would >>> require uncounted users to alter the way they work. What exactly would >>> be the advantage of that? >> >> Note that it is very simple to make it mandatory for any given project >> (or jumble of projects thrown together in one directory) - simply do >> not have a makefile called "makefile" (or "Makefile"), and have a >> selection of different ".mk" files instead. So if Bart wants that, >> "make" already supports it. >> >>> >>> Do you want to put files for all your projects in a single directory, >>> with a distinct makefile for each? You can do that. >>> >>>> However do you manage to run even a text editor? >>> >>> Be serious. >>> >> > > Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? I remember many years ago, where I forgot to use a tab in a makefile and the damn thing would not work.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 15:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87lee8hu3j.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #172507 |
"Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes:
[...]
> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile?
Yes, I have. I quickly found and corrected the error.
As I recall, the original author of make acknowledged requiring tab
characters was a mistake. It's hardly a fatal flaw.
If you're using GNU make, you can use something like ".RECIPEPREFIX = >"
to avoid the problem.
I'm curious just what point you're trying to make.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-18 15:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ubos78$dvtq$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172509 |
On 8/18/2023 3:19 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: > "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> writes: > [...] >> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? > > Yes, I have. I quickly found and corrected the error. > > As I recall, the original author of make acknowledged requiring tab > characters was a mistake. It's hardly a fatal flaw. > > If you're using GNU make, you can use something like ".RECIPEPREFIX = >" > to avoid the problem. > > I'm curious just what point you're trying to make. > My point is: Been there done that. I learned from my mistake, and make is fine with me. Fair enough?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-19 13:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ubq8h1$peg5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172507 |
On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > > Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. (Some people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor convert tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and that really does screw things up. I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between tabs and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the original author of make.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-26 20:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ucehh9$112u9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172521 |
On 8/19/2023 4:19 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > >> >> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? > > I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. That's a good thing (for sure). Well, I had this nice make file I created, and it would not work. God damn it David, it was a missing tab. Ahh shit. Well, been there done that. I am glad that you have never had to mess around with that type of error in your makefiles, in your own work! Yikes! (Some > people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor convert > tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and that > really does screw things up. > > I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between tabs > and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the original > author of make. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-26 20:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ucehj2$112u9$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172521 |
On 8/19/2023 4:19 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > >> >> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? > > I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. (Some > people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor convert > tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and that > really does screw things up. > > I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between tabs > and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the original > author of make. > Tabs for spacing, humm, as in tap tab and 4 spaces are generated, right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 00:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10939876-371e-456a-8819-59bf39bca3a7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #172856 |
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 11:57:36 PM UTC-4, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 8/19/2023 4:19 AM, David Brown wrote: > > On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > > > >> > >> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? > > > > I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. (Some > > people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor convert > > tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and that > > really does screw things up. > > > > I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between tabs > > and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the original > > author of make. > > > Tabs for spacing, humm, as in tap tab and 4 spaces are generated, right? Yes, that's the conversion that David was referring to, that screws up makefiles. What's needed is an editor where tapping tab places a tab character (and NOT 4 spaces) in the saved makefile.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | candycane@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet (candycane) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 03:34 +1300 |
| Message-ID | <1727171653@f172.n1.z21.fsxnet> |
| In reply to | #172865 |
ja> Yes, that's the conversion that David was referring to, that screws up ja> makefiles. What's needed is an editor where tapping tab places a tab ja> character (and NOT 4 spaces) in the saved makefile. As a last resort, you could use a hex editor to switch it out. ----------------------------------- user is generated from /dev/urandom
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 08:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <20230827013147.751@kylheku.com> |
| In reply to | #172865 |
On 2023-08-27, james...@alumni.caltech.edu <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: > Yes, that's the conversion that David was referring to, that screws up > makefiles. What's needed is an editor where tapping tab places a tab > character (and NOT 4 spaces) in the saved makefile. If your programer's editor does not recognize "Makefile" or "whatever.mk" and adjust its settings for makefile editing, here is a dime kid ... -- TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 16:58 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ucfoao$1766j$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172871 |
On 27/08/2023 10:32, Kaz Kylheku wrote: > On 2023-08-27, james...@alumni.caltech.edu <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: >> Yes, that's the conversion that David was referring to, that screws up >> makefiles. What's needed is an editor where tapping tab places a tab >> character (and NOT 4 spaces) in the saved makefile. > > If your programer's editor does not recognize "Makefile" or > "whatever.mk" and adjust its settings for makefile editing, here > is a dime kid ... > Most editors can handle that. But I have used a large number of editors over the years, on different OS's - some sophisticated, some less so, depending on my needs at the time. And sometime I've accidentally triggered a tab-to-space conversion.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 11:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ucg6bv$19onb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172881 |
On 8/27/2023 7:58 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 27/08/2023 10:32, Kaz Kylheku wrote: >> On 2023-08-27, james...@alumni.caltech.edu >> <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: >>> Yes, that's the conversion that David was referring to, that screws up >>> makefiles. What's needed is an editor where tapping tab places a tab >>> character (and NOT 4 spaces) in the saved makefile. >> >> If your programer's editor does not recognize "Makefile" or >> "whatever.mk" and adjust its settings for makefile editing, here >> is a dime kid ... >> > > Most editors can handle that. Yup. MSVC handles that. A tab is 4 spaces in my personal C++ code. Actually, there is a funny scene in Silicon Valley about this very issue: https://youtu.be/SsoOG6ZeyUI > But I have used a large number of editors > over the years, on different OS's - some sophisticated, some less so, > depending on my needs at the time. And sometime I've accidentally > triggered a tab-to-space conversion. > >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 16:52 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ucfnvg$1766j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172856 |
On 27/08/2023 05:57, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 8/19/2023 4:19 AM, David Brown wrote: >> On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> >>> >>> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? >> >> I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. (Some >> people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor >> convert tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and >> that really does screw things up. >> >> I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between tabs >> and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the original >> author of make. >> > > Tabs for spacing, humm, as in tap tab and 4 spaces are generated, right? No - press the tab key, and a tab character is generated. I generally view files at 4 spaces per tab. But I mostly use real tab characters in my files. However, consistency is very important - if I'm working with a file with spaces, I keep it as spaces (unless I am making so many changes that I do a spaces-to-tab operation in my editor).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-27 11:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ucg6dp$19onb$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #172880 |
On 8/27/2023 7:52 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 27/08/2023 05:57, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 8/19/2023 4:19 AM, David Brown wrote: >>> On 18/08/2023 23:34, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Have you ever forgot to use a tab in a makefile? >>> >>> I don't think so, because I use tabs generally for spacing. (Some >>> people prefer spaces, others tabs.) But I /have/ had an editor >>> convert tabs to spaces, or spaces to tabs, on saving a makefile - and >>> that really does screw things up. >>> >>> I doubt if there is anyone that considers the distinction between >>> tabs and spaces in makefiles to be a good idea. That includes the >>> original author of make. >>> >> >> Tabs for spacing, humm, as in tap tab and 4 spaces are generated, right? > > No - press the tab key, and a tab character is generated. I generally > view files at 4 spaces per tab. But I mostly use real tab characters in > my files. However, consistency is very important - if I'm working with > a file with spaces, I keep it as spaces (unless I am making so many > changes that I do a spaces-to-tab operation in my editor). > Right now, I have my editor setup where a single press of a tab generates four spaces.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web