Makefile experts, unite!

[Sebastien Alaiwan via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 12 June 2017 at 07:00:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Monday, June 12, 2017 06:34:31 Sebastien Alaiwan via 
> Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On Monday, 12 June 2017 at 06:30:16 UTC, ketmar wrote:
>> > Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> >> It's certainly a pain to edit the makefiles though
>> >
>> > and don't forget those Great Copying Lists to copy modules. 
>> > forgetting to include module in one of the lists was 
>> > happened before, not once or twice...
>>
>> I don't get it, could you please show an example?
>
> posix.mak is a lot better than it used to be, but with 
> win{32,64}.mak, you have to list the modules all over the 
> place. So, adding or removing a module becomes a royal pain, 
> and it's very easy to screw up. Ideally, we'd just list the 
> modules once in one file that was then used across all of the 
> platforms rather than having to edit several files every time 
> we add or remove anything. And the fact that we're using make 
> for all of this makes that difficult if not impossible 
> (especially with the very limited make that we're using on 
> Windows).

Are you implying that we are currently keeping compatibility with 
NMAKE (the 'make' from MS)?

GNU make inclusion mechanism makes it possible and easy to share 
a list of modules between makefiles.

Before switching to a fancy BS, we might benefit from learning to 
fully take advantage of the one we currently have!