Re: Using LS/LE

[Collin Funk <collin.funk1@gmail.com>]

"G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> writes:

>> Interesting.  The day someone complains again about my makefiles, I'll
>> point to this data.  I checked a few other projects out of curiosity:
>> 
>> 	alx@devuan:~/src/shadow/shadow/master$ find | grep '\.am$' | grep -v gnulib | sort | xargs wc -c | tail -n1
>> 	31885 total
>> 	alx@devuan:~/src/gnu/glibc/master$ find | grep '\.am$' | grep -v gnulib | sort | xargs wc -c | tail -n1
>> 	0
>> 	alx@devuan:~/src/gnu/gcc/master$ find | grep '\.am$' | grep -v gnulib | sort | xargs wc -c | tail -n1
>> 	1527474 total
>> 	alx@devuan:~/src/gnu/coreutils/master$ find | grep '\.am$' | grep -v gnulib | sort | xargs wc -c | tail -n1
>> 	8171 ./Makefile.am
>> 	alx@devuan:~/src/gnu/findutils/master$ find | grep '\.am$' | grep -v gnulib | sort | xargs wc -c | tail -n1
>> 	35765 total
>> 
>> Does glibc not use automake?  What do they use?
>
> Hand-written Makefiles, apparently! For a while I followed their Git
> commits, but I'm well behind on them.  glibc and GCC saturated my
> ability to keep up with the projects I track.

Yes, glibc uses GNU make extensively. It is quite difficult to read if
you do not understand GNU make extensions, compared to Automake which is
for the most part just declaring targets and sources. It also requires
more upkeep to make sure things work correctly, e.g., parallelism.

So, I don't think pointing out that Automake files have a similar file
size to regular Makefiles is a good comparison.

Collin