4 ms·

I don't understand what you are unhappy about. When maintaining recipes for building packages, i'd always prefer to debug a Makefile where i can insert a `sh -

• duped 4y ago
  > than some magic tools that attempts to do everything for me and then fails without observable reason. Ok, but then what about autoconf/autoreconf, aclocal, and automake used to generate makefiles for what seems like the entire GNU ecosystem? At least the "magic" tools that are more modern have documentation. You can print debug a cmake build pretty dang easily, and it at least doesn't pull in the entire user environment implicitly.
  • blueflow 4y ago
    Please back up the implicit claim of missing documentation.
  • JohnFen 4y ago
    > Ok, but then what about autoconf/autoreconf, aclocal, and automake used to generate makefiles for what seems like the entire GNU ecosystem? I thought we were talking about make, though. Autoconf and the ilk is an entirely different conversation.
    • duped 4y ago
      It's really not, since they're used to generate or manage so many make builds.
      • JohnFen 4y ago
        But make is most often used without those other tools. Autoconf serves a very different purpose than make.