On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 17:28 +0100, Steffen Dettmer wrote: > When having a source three constructed of several (sub-) > packages, how does a Beta-Build system looks like? Could there be > tupfiles including sub-tup-files? > > What influence has the choice of a Beta-Build to the > maintainability of such a sub package? Can they still be > orthogonal to each other?
I don't offhand see any reason why a Beta build system couldn't use the same makefile syntax as make, even GNU make. It seems plausible that the parser which creates the DAG, etc. could be kept basically as-is. However, I think the "walk the DAG", build decision parts of make would have to be tossed and completely re-done. You might have to add some new definitions to the makefile (for example lists of files/directories that should be considered "watched" and ones that should be omitted). > How portable can a Beta-Build system be? Isn't it requiring > specific extentions to watch the file system by some event bus or > such? That would be one way, and is certainly the most efficient. Another would be to simply stat all the files up-front; that could be done on any system. Obviously this is much more time-consuming. On the other hand you can avoid a lot of rule matching/searching/etc. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <psm...@gnu.org> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.mad-scientist.net "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
