Re: Using LS/LE (was: [PATCH v4 2/4] man/man5/tunables.conf: Document system-wide tunables config)

[Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2235 bytes --]

> Date: 2026-08-29 10:42:14+0200
> From: Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>
>
> Hi Larry,
> 
> > Date: 2026-08-28 22:50:50-0400
> > From: Larry Kollar <larry.kollar@icloud.com>
> >
> > 
> > Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > I believe that a set of makefiles that would handle all of the targets
> > > of a project like groff wouldn't take much more than that.  It might be
> > > a few hundred kB.  If it's well organized, it can be maintainable.
> > > 
> > > Because the makefile language is so simple, bugs are easy to spot and
> > > fix, compared to autotools (possibly automake, but I can't distinguish
> > > them enough).
> > 
> > I don’t know. Can a Makefile check for the presence of certain libraries
> > or other apps and fail gracefully (by which I mean exiting with a message
> > like “You need app X, plus libraries Y and Z, installed to successfully
> > compile this.”)? That’s one of the things that “makes" me appreciate taking
> > that extra step of typing `.configure` before make.
> 
> Yes, it can.  Here's a trivial test for that:
> 
> 	alx@devuan:~/tmp/testlib$ cat Makefile 
> 	HAS_LIBFOO := $(shell find /usr/include/foo.h >/dev/null && echo yes || echo no)
> 
> 	ifeq ($(HAS_LIBFOO),no)
> 	  $(error You need library FOO installed to successfully compile this.)

Oh, I didn't need the period here...

> 	endif
> 
> 	all:
> 		echo Done
> 	alx@devuan:~/tmp/testlib$ make
> 	find: ‘/usr/include/foo.h’: No such file or directory
> 	Makefile:4: *** You need library FOO installed to successfully compile this..  Stop.

... make(1) already appended one here.

:)

> 
> You may of course write more complex tests if you need.  Anything that
> you can do with a shell script, you can do it with a Makefile.
> 
> That said, I personally prefer to fail compilation due to missing header
> files.  It's simpler, and there's not much difference.  After all, if
> compilation fails for <foo.h>, it's trivial to run
> 
> 	$ apt-file find /include/foo.h
> 
> But if you want the test, you can have it.
> 
> 
> Have a lovely day!
> Alex
> 
> -- 
> <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>



-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]