Synaptics: a number of issues with commit 39afe69ad7d2

[Gaetan Nadon]

On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 09:26 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:

> On the other hand, I believe non-recursive make adds to the complexity
> of the build rather than reducing it. With classic recursive automake,
> it's very easy to divide and conquer tasks into subdirectories. Since
> each Makefile is separate, you can tailor it specifically to what's
> going on in that directory (e.g. creating manpages) and you don't have
> to worry about variable or pathname collisions at all.
> 
> 

That's my number one motivation. So nicely put. There will be more bugs
in non-recursive makefiles. Automake is already a significant learning
curve,
and there have been plenty of bugs in any makefile with unrelated target
types.
There is a high turn over rate of maintainers, when there is one.

When anyone makes a change in a non-recursive makefile, however simple
it maybe,
he has to unit test the 5 other targets in the makefile, not just the
one he is familiar with. 
With subdirectories, there is no risk of breaking those other targets.

This makes it possible for people with lower level of Automake skills to
perform
tasks that would otherwise be too risky. These are more project
management
than technical issues. We can't assume that everyone has all the skills
to do
everything.

Anyway, I ran the test before and after the patch and there is no
performance gain whatsoever.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20110614/56676090/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20110614/56676090/attachment.pgp>