[MPlayer-dev-eng] The new Makefiles

[Diego Biurrun]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 02:01:02PM +0200, Alban Bedel wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:54:05 +0200
> Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 03:08:49AM +0200, Alban Bedel wrote:
> > > On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:34:26 +0200
> > > Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 03:31:36PM +0200, Alban Bedel wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > so the new flat build system is underway. Sadly IMHO it have a
> > > > > few shortcomings and there is some things that I think we
> > > > > should discuss here before going any further.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The most important point IMHO, is do we really get rid of
> > > > > the .a or not? On the plus side I only see a few rule less in
> > > > > the Makefile. On the minus side the whole source list is
> > > > > required for any tool using the lib in question.
> > > > 
> > > > We would just need the relevant object files.  You do have a point
> > > > that this can be a burden to maintain.
> > > 
> > > IMHO if we don't have the .a anymore we should have an includeable
> > > Makefile with the corresponding file list. Otherwise anybody
> > > wanting to use this code (that is us in the case of the tools) must
> > > duplicate a good part of our build system, and keep up with any
> > > change in it.
> >  
> > I see no difference between
> > 
> > SRCS = foo.c bar.c baz.c
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > SRCS += subdir/foo.c subdir/bar.c subdir/baz.c
> 
> But if a tool need only subdir/* it must recreate that second list. With
> all the conditional used nowadays in the Makefiles that's far from as
> trivial as it look here. And what for? To spare _one_ line in the main
> Makefile.

This is trivially solved by the use of variables.

> I would suggest you try to merge the tools Makefile next. If you take
> the approach you suggest you will clearly see that the 3 lines you so
> bitterly want to spare become a couple dozen more and a clear burden on
> maintenance.

Done.

Diego