-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Simon Josefsson wrote: > Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> If we make maint.mk minimal, it would be excellent to make coreutils' >> Makefile.maint do 'include maint.mk'. This was the idea all along. >> I'll suggest patches for gnulib/coreutils to achieve this.
<snip> > The second set of patches is against gnulib to remove most of the rules > in coreutils, to avoid duplication. This removes some features from > gnulib's maint.mk, but has anyone been using them heavily? If so, we > can add them again by making small incremental patches against coreutils > and gnulib. > > Thoughts? Didn't you just remove the vast majority of targets from maint.mk? There's barely anything left at all! Why bother having a maint.mk in the first place then? I have only just begun using it, but I find all of the following useful: > -sc_cast_of_argument_to_free: > -sc_cast_of_x_alloc_return_value: > -sc_cast_of_alloca_return_value: > -sc_space_tab: ^^ *especially* that one... > -sc_changelog: > -syntax-check: $(syntax-check-rules) Throwing out several useful rules, which AFAICT make up almost the entirety of maint.mk, just because coreutils already has them, is a bad move, IMO. - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHHNyC7M8hyUobTrERCK9sAJ9GTKUKXek4G12LkKBfzymoyyoLRQCZAW7a LllTXdR1ZnmDuMW9kvg3uIQ= =+8Rf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
