logs archiveBotHelp.net / Freenode / #2f30 / 2015 / July / 19 / 5
k0ga
I wanted xD
FRIGN: done
in the config.mk you can find the options you need for OpenBSD
FRIGN
k0ga: cool!
k0ga
you only have to discomment them
FRIGN
# scc - Sucless C Compiler
k0ga
this is a simplified suckless Makefile, mainly because at this moment the instalation is not done
FRIGN
typo ;)
k0ga
ups
please correct it ^^!
does it work for you?
FRIGN
I'll test it
sec
don't comment the CFLAGS
they are _neeeeded_ to compile on 99% of the systems :P
duuude
k0ga
hahahahhahaha
only in OpenBSD
FRIGN
no
also here on Gentoo
k0ga
discoment them if you want
(and send the patch)
FRIGN
k0ga: there's a problem
k0ga
please. let me know
FRIGN
k0ga: if you set CFLAGS in the config.mk, they are not pushed to the Makefiles in the subdirectories
k0ga
uhmmmmm
FRIGN
putting the loop into the main Makefile is also not very elegant
k0ga
FRIGN: 9base did the same
I will include config.mk in the internal makefiles
FRIGN
What I tried yesterday was writing a single main Makefile which has procedures for compiling cc1 cc2 and the lib
and that's how it should be done
9base is 10 years old, don't use it as a reference ;)
take a look at sbase and see how we did it with libutf, libutil and all the other things
k0ga
I know that recursive Makefile generate some problems, mainly the speed of the compilation
FRIGN
k0ga: It's not about speed, it's about clarity
k0ga
but ins this case is simple and small
I think this form is clearer because each Makefile is smaller
FRIGN
k0ga: trust me, if you follow the Make-axioms properly, the single main Makefile will be shorter than the different Makefiles combined
and btw, you are not really using the benefits of the make system really
You might as well just write a shellscript then :
:P
Sadly, I'm not that much of a Makefile-wizar
d
k0ga
the only dependence that thay have outside of every directory is the library
if the library is rebuild then all the projects will be rebuild
because all of them have the library as dependence
FRIGN
this dep-resolution is done automatically inside the makefile
k0ga
and the headers in inc to
FRIGN
what about inc/ btw?
are these used by both cc1 and cc2?
k0ga
$(OBJS) : cc1.h ../inc/cc.h ../inc/sizes.h
in cc1
$(OBJS): ../inc/cc.h ../inc/sizes.h cc2.h
in cc2
FRIGN
alright
k0ga
cc2: $(OBJS) ../lib/libcc.a
cc1: $(OBJS) ../lib/libcc.a
FRIGN
k0ga: are you pushing something soon?
else I'll start working on the Makefile and think of sth
k0ga
yes, I'll push the modifications to the Makefile
FRIGN
ok
k0ga
FRIGN: pushed
can you try now?
FRIGN
sure, lemme check
can we remove build.sh and env.sh now? :D
works!
:D
k0ga
ok
I will create build.sh in my plan9 machine
FRIGN
what do you mean?
there's no need for it any more, right?
If you want the special cflags for plan9 (namely, -D_SUSV2_SOURCE -DNBOOL), then you just add it to config.mk ;)
k0ga
I think so
please feel free of removing them
FRIGN: did you see the message of the commit?
xD
FRIGN
k0ga: yes
I'll make the changes
sec
Evil_Bob
yeah please add the c99 flags, its also needed on alpine i think
FRIGN
k0ga: Evil_Bob: http://git.suckless.org/scc/commit/?id=eff46e86a3d7b4106d97977bd974c7266ecc9c6c
btw, k0ga, can't we just remove the gitignore-files?
I personally do not want them to end up in the tar.gz :P
It's like the hgignore-files all over again
what do you think?
Evil_Bob
nice, i think the .gitignore files are fine though
FRIGN
Evil_Bob: Dude, don't you remember hgignore?
do you really want me to dig this out?
Ah, I mean .hgtags :P
Evil_Bob: Fun fact: .gitignore in / has *.o, but there's no way object files would "drop" in /
^^
Evil_Bob
no but its recursive :)
it will ignore the *.o in underlying dirs too
Drakevr
yup its recursive
FRIGN
FUCK
:P
Evil_Bob: We have no gitignore in sbase
and I have like 200 files on the list
dead test-dirs, copies, backups
but it does not hold up at all
« prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next »