I prefer just files these days.
Comment on Eric S. Raymond / autodafe · Tools for freeing your project from the clammy grip of autotools.
umbraroze@lemmy.world 7 months ago
converting an autotools build recipe
Oh yes!
to a bare makefile
Oh no!
richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one 7 months ago
7heo@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
Honestly, if the makefile is well written, I will take that any day. Good makefiles are 😙👌.
They are extremely rare, tho…
Bogasse@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
I’ve always conjectured that good Makefiles existed but never seen one (or only for tiny projects). The core semantic of Makefiles is clear and straight to the point, I think the issue is in all the magic that was added to that to spare a few lines.
PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
Perl? I had fun compiling perl from source back in the day.
7heo@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
IMHO the issue is two folds:
flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
Why compile to a Makefile? You’d end up with automake gunk all over again. Just use cmake or so, where the declarative language replaces the Makefile entirely
Corngood@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
cmake compiles to makefiles as well (it just also supports some other backends). I’m not sure why that matters though. In both cases the makefile is generated.
addie@feddit.uk 7 months ago
Not that I’m the biggest fan of CMake’s syntax, but they are fairly concise and standardised. The XZ backdoor hid in amongst thousands of lines of autotools jank that very few people would be able to audit. A short CMakeList that generates a Makefile is a much harder place to hide something nefarious.
flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
It does? I guess I never looked inside that build directory.