[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: serious doubts about waf
From: |
Matthias Kilian |
Subject: |
Re: serious doubts about waf |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:35:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.3i |
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 02:38:12PM -0800, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> I don't have much experience *using* automake, but from what I've
> read:
>
> - A Makefile.am is easier to maintain than an equivalent handcoded
> makefile.
> - The generated makefiles will be very portable (not reliant on GNU
> make).
> - Automake integrates well with Autoconf, probably more so than the
> current stepmake system.
One problem with automake (and autoconf) is that it's incredibly
difficult to debug if something goes wrong.
Ciao,
Kili
[PATCH] Re: serious doubts about waf, John Mandereau, 2009/11/11
- Re: [PATCH] Re: serious doubts about waf, Graham Percival, 2009/11/11
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, John Mandereau, 2009/11/12
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, Graham Percival, 2009/11/12
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, Graham Percival, 2009/11/14
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, John Mandereau, 2009/11/24
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, Graham Percival, 2009/11/24
- Re: [PATCH] serious doubts about waf, John Mandereau, 2009/11/24