On 2020/03/15 21:46:38, hanwenn wrote: > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:44 PM <mailto:jonas.hahnf...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Using whatever makes sense from the GNU build system and reduce the > > maintenance burden of the build system as much as possible. FWIW I fully > > agree with David that the current shortcomings originate from what > > LilyPond builds around Autoconf, GNU make et al. Using standard > > solutions (aclocal, possibly Automake for dependencies of C++ files) > > should enable us to reuse what others have already solved. > > I don't disagree with the analysis of the root cause, but getting rid > of the recursive make for a non-recursive one means a complete > rewrite, and not one that can be done incrementally. When you do a > complete rewrite, you might as well reconsider the fundamental > assumptions, one of which is "use the GNU build stack". > > I have plenty of experience with Automake, GNU make, building > lilypond, and build systems in general. My conclusion of this > experience is that it is a pretty poor stack,
... which has led to the invention of Stepmake in the past ... > and for that reason I am > experimenting with something that is completely different. So we start another cycle of writing a custom build system. Fabulous! </sarcasm> https://codereview.appspot.com/553700043/
