Le 06-07-30 à 13:03, Quentin Mathé a écrit :
Le 30 juil. 06 à 15:48, Chris Vetter a écrit :
On 2006-07-30 15:28:15 +0200 Yves de Champlain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
darwin.org> wrote:
It may be not a big deal, but it lacks some logic. there should
be 2 kinds of subproject
1- project X depends on subproject 1, 2, ... n
2- subprojects 1, 2, ... n depend on project Y
Yes, but you're free to change the order of the listed sub-
projects based on the dependency of each other.
In example 1 you would write
SUBPROJECTS = sub1 sub2 ... subn projectX
and in example 2
SUBPROJECTS = projectY sub1 sub2 ... subn
Sorry, but I still don't see the problem.
If you don't move your project code in subprojects, this isn't
going to work because Project X and Project Y aren't subprojects
but just different targets for the project (which owns the
subprojects)… Hoping I have made no mistakes in my understanding of
Yves' proposal :-)
I don't really know much how subprojects work so I can't say much,
but theses two subprojects types are really two different things that
happen to have the same name because of their nested structure. We
could talk, for example :
TOP_DIR - Project X - subproject a
- subproject b (here, X depends on a and b)
- Project Y - extension a
- extension b (here, a and b depend on Y)
yves
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
