Skip to content

Improve Makefile#2

Open
koraa wants to merge 5 commits intoSpiritdude:masterfrom
koraa:master
Open

Improve Makefile#2
koraa wants to merge 5 commits intoSpiritdude:masterfrom
koraa:master

Conversation

@koraa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@koraa koraa commented Sep 4, 2013

Fix some coding standards: Don't use sudo, don't use scp, don't bump clean if already clean.
Add dynamic version(, prefix,...) setting to the command script by injecting those variables with meta programming.
Don't push to origin in Makefile; use a custom remote called 'central', create it automagically if necessary.'

@Spiritdude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Sorry for late response. I have abandoned this project mostly, as OpenJSCAD.org covers all and more functionality.

I like the Makefile improvements you did, except the .proto file introduction: if I understand correct, you distinct of openjscad vs openjscad.proto, and openjscad.proto becomes main source to edit, and running 'make' to insert config.js into openjscad.proto -> openjscad, correct? If this is the case, this means, openjscad.proto itself is not functional, and all changes in the source require make to run to create a functional openjscad.

@koraa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

koraa commented Sep 12, 2013

Yes. If you don't like this, we could use require config.js in *.proto and replace that during make..
This would render *.proto functional.

@Spiritdude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Yes, the .proto itself should be functional, that works better. If you remove 'require ...' in the final exec and add those vars, then why not simply update openjscad with those few lines of vars, and mark them with '// -- updated by make (do not remove comment)' - if you are versed in sed and can accomplish this, then there is no need for a .proto anymore.

@koraa
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

koraa commented Sep 12, 2013

Sorry, I said nonsence, but noticed and deleted to late. (And hoped you would not notice ;) )

What wonders me…
does invoking ./openjscad work right now,?
Because the includes are performed by using the lib variable which does not point at the source tree…

If so, the right action would be to use a tool like browserify and don't use a PREFIX variable at all.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants