guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] build: Move included files to subdirectories.


From: Ludovic Courtès
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] build: Move included files to subdirectories.
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:46:31 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

Eric Bavier <address@hidden> skribis:

> On Sun,  3 Apr 2016 18:18:45 +0200
> Mathieu Lirzin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> This follows a convention used by some other GNU packages like Autoconf,
>> Bison, Coreutils, and Gnulib.
>> 
>> * doc.am: Rename to ...
>> * doc/local.mk: ... this.
>> * emacs.am: Rename to ...
>> * emacs/local.mk: ... this.
>> * gnu-system.am: Rename to ...
>> * gnu/local.mk: ... this.
>> * daemon.am: Rename to ...
>> * nix/local.mk: ... this.
>> * Makefile.am: Adapt to them.
>> * doc/guix.texi (Porting to a New Platform): Adapt documentation.
>> * guix/config.scm.in (%state-directory, %config-directory): Adapt comments.
>> * emacs/guix-config.el.in (guix-config-state-directory): Likewise.
>> ---
>>  Makefile.am             |   8 +-
>>  daemon.am               | 226 -------------
>>  doc.am                  | 157 ---------
>>  doc/guix.texi           |   2 +-
>>  doc/local.mk            | 157 +++++++++
>>  emacs.am                |  73 ----
>>  emacs/guix-config.el.in |   2 +-
>>  emacs/local.mk          |  73 ++++
>>  gnu-system.am           | 883 
>> ------------------------------------------------
>>  gnu/local.mk            | 883 
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  guix/config.scm.in      |   4 +-
>>  nix/local.mk            | 226 +++++++++++++
>>  12 files changed, 1347 insertions(+), 1347 deletions(-)
>>  delete mode 100644 daemon.am
>>  delete mode 100644 doc.am
>>  create mode 100644 doc/local.mk
>>  delete mode 100644 emacs.am
>>  create mode 100644 emacs/local.mk
>>  delete mode 100644 gnu-system.am
>>  create mode 100644 gnu/local.mk
>>  create mode 100644 nix/local.mk
>> 
>
> I don't prefer the "local.mk" convention.  It becomes
> non-obvious that the file is input for Automake, and the name loses any
> descriptive power.

I have mixed feelings (notably because file names in those .mk files
remain relative to $top_srcdir, which can be confusing and will make M-/
useless), but I sympathize with the initial motivation, and I think it
can’t hurt to follow the same conventions as important GNU packages.

So if there aren’t any strong objections within a day or two, I’d say go
for it!

Thanks,
Ludo’.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]