Re: [cc65] THE Makefile V1.2 available - was: automatic generation of makefile dependencies

From: Greg King <>
Date: 2011-06-02 20:59:20
From: "Oliver Schmidt"; on Wed., June 01, 2011; at 05:18 PM -0400
> > The "mkdir" and "rmdir" commands should be handled in the same way
> > that "rm" is handled. Define and use:
> >
> > MKDIR ?= mkdir -p
> > RMDIR ?= rmdir
> They "could" be handled that way, but it's not correct to say they
> "should" because - intentionally - there's an implicit variable RM,
> but no MKDIR / RMDIR:

I didn't see anything about it being intentional.  I claim that it is an
oversight.  I claim that "should" is the correct word.  I go further:  I
say that _all_ command-names that a makefile will issue _should_ be
"encapsulated" in predefined variables.  The reason why it should be
done for all of them is the same reason why it was done for "rm -f": so
that a developer easily can accomodate the differences between different
operating systems' command-processors.

To unsubscribe from the list send mail to with
the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.
Received on Thu Jun 2 20:59:58 2011

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2011-06-02 21:00:02 CEST