You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Daniel L. Rall" <dl...@collab.net> on 2004/03/17 01:27:08 UTC
Makefile target naming conventions
Ben Reser wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:16:22PM -0800, Daniel L. Rall wrote:
...
>>+swig-java-clean:
>>+ rm -rf $(SWIG_JAVA_DIR)/org/tigris/subversion/swig/
>>+
>> # Different versions of SWIG generate the Java source files in
>> # different directories.
>> swig-java-setup:
>
>
> You mean clean-swig-java. :)
Well, I was following the pattern established by Justin with the
"javahl-java", "javahl-tests", and "javahl-javah" targets, and perpetuated by
myself in r9080 with the "swig-java-java", "swig-java-api", "swig-java-tests"
targets.
Justin did use a "clean-javahl" target, and I followed suite with
"clean-swig-java" target (also in r9080). I noticed the difference, but
figured it wouldn't be long before someone would clue me in on what convention
we are actually using.
[action]-[thing-being-built]-[anything-more-here?] ???
Thanks, Dan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Makefile target naming conventions
Posted by "Daniel L. Rall" <dl...@collab.net>.
Daniel L. Rall wrote:
> Ben Reser wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 12:16:22PM -0800, Daniel L. Rall wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> +swig-java-clean:
>>> + rm -rf $(SWIG_JAVA_DIR)/org/tigris/subversion/swig/
>>> +
>>> # Different versions of SWIG generate the Java source files in
>>> # different directories.
>>> swig-java-setup:
>>
>>
>>
>> You mean clean-swig-java. :)
>
>
> Well, I was following the pattern established by Justin with the
> "javahl-java", "javahl-tests", and "javahl-javah" targets, and
> perpetuated by myself in r9080 with the "swig-java-java",
> "swig-java-api", "swig-java-tests" targets.
>
> Justin did use a "clean-javahl" target, and I followed suite with
> "clean-swig-java" target (also in r9080). I noticed the difference, but
> figured it wouldn't be long before someone would clue me in on what
> convention we are actually using.
>
> [action]-[thing-being-built]-[anything-more-here?] ???
I'm unclear that we're even using convention past lowercase naming involving
separating words by dashes (sometimes). What about targets like "doc-clean"
and "fast-distclean"?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Re: Makefile target naming conventions
Posted by Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>.
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 05:27:08PM -0800, Daniel L. Rall wrote:
> Well, I was following the pattern established by Justin with the
> "javahl-java", "javahl-tests", and "javahl-javah" targets, and perpetuated
> by myself in r9080 with the "swig-java-java", "swig-java-api",
> "swig-java-tests" targets.
I must have missed those targets.
> Justin did use a "clean-javahl" target, and I followed suite with
> "clean-swig-java" target (also in r9080). I noticed the difference, but
> figured it wouldn't be long before someone would clue me in on what
> convention we are actually using.
>
> [action]-[thing-being-built]-[anything-more-here?] ???
I don't think we've been following any particular convention. Except
the bindings targets have been [action]-[binding].
Either way is fine with me. As long as we stay consistent.
--
Ben Reser <be...@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org