Re: pentium woes, was: broken mailers

[Glenn Maynard <glenn@...>]

On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 08:05:58AM -0300, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo wrote:
> > grumbling about the mess that Lua 5.1 became by dumping lua.c and
> > other non-library source files right in src ...)
> 
> We thought it made things simpler... (It's also simpler to keep track of
> dependencies.) On the other hand, src/Makefile tries to document all the
> bits that make up the build. For instance, there's

I added the Lua source to our CVS tree, and I had to tell people which files
to skip when adding them to their project files for each architecture.  This
is much simpler if library files aren't mixed in with standalone source files.

For most libraries this isn't an issue, since they're just built or installed
normally (so I don't care what their layout is), but Lua is unusual in
encouraging direct embedding, and it would be helpful for the directory
layout to facilitate that.

> Do you have (or anyone else) any suggestions on how to improve src/Makefile?
> (Perhaps we could replace "all" in the platform-specific rules with $(ALL).)

I'm not using the Makefile.  Not all platforms use make (Windows), and
for Unix targets, I'd have to jump hoops for it to be run cleanly by our
Makefile.  (For example, making sure the "build outside of source tree"
scheme supported by automake works.)  I can minimize how exceptional Lua
is (which translates to the amount of effort it takes to bring up and
maintain archs) by adding the files directly to my projects and not trying
to treat it as a library.

(It's also nice for make to not recurse down into Lua's directory every
build.)

-- 
Glenn Maynard