Re: [dev] Reasonable Makefiles

From: Kurt Van Dijck <>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 14:32:58 +0100

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:41:43AM +0100, FRIGN wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:28:25 +0100
> Markus Teich <> wrote:
> > Heyho,
> >
> > Regarding the include used in various suckless projects: What is the
> > benefit? If a user needs to adapt it to his system, he effectively has to edit a
> > file. Would there be a problem if this file would be the Makefile instead of the
> > file?
> Regarding the, I don't see the benefit, either.

The major benefit I see is: is build/host/target specific, Makefile is not.
Makefile goes into versioning, does not.
Combinining those complicates life.

> If I didn't
> know the concept how suckless-projects are organized in regard to their
> makefiles, I would look at the Makefile first and probably not notice
> the

Editing directly in Makefile does work, but complicates long term
Your argument does not show that using is a wrong concept,
it illustrates that it's not enforced.


> I myself prefer a centralized make-system over a decentralized one with
> includes, but I'm sure there are people around here who can give good
> reasons for decentralizing this.

I would using 2 files hardly call 'decentralized'. Things can become worse
than that :-)

Received on Tue Feb 11 2014 - 14:32:58 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 11 2014 - 14:36:19 CET