3 ms·

What is so horrible about using cp makefiles/`uname -o`/`uname -m`/Makefile . to copy the correct makefile for the platform?

• astrange 16y ago
  Not having to maintain multiple Makefiles. Also multiple incompatible compilers, and cross-compiling… and Darwin doesn't have uname -o, and Linux's uname -o has a / in the output. Hmm, what isn't wrong with it?
  • brazzy 16y ago
    The expression you're looking for is "combinatorical explosion".
• snorkel 16y ago
  You can also have one Makefile that contains conditionals (http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/make/Conditional-Example.html#Conditional-Example http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/make/Conditional...) based on $(uname -s). I agree with the rant, autoconf has outlived it's purpose.
  • kelnos 16y ago
    uname utterly fails when cross compiling.