This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Harald Welte laforge at gnumonks.orgHi Sylvain,
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:18:37AM +0200, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
> In general I'm not a big fan of the flattening ... I kinda like that
> each repo is responsible for defining it's own source files. Beside
> build speed (which for me is not really an argument given it's so
> small), what are the advantages ?
I personally like the 'flattening' idea to some extent, especially since
you don't have to add another 'Makefile' line to configure.ac and do a
full autoreconf/configure/make cycle every time you add one file to the
repository. I haven't tried it, but I suppose now it is sufficient to
simply add the file to Makefile.am, and a simple "make" will notice it,
regenerate Makefile and build.
So I'm not sure if the benefit of having Makefile.[am,in] for each
subdirectory (especially the empty ones like 'include' which just state
a single SUBDIR line) really is the better approach.
But of course, for your code / repositories you maintain, it is your
decision, I just wanted to share some thoughts.
Regards,
Harald
--
- Harald Welte <laforge at gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)