Closed argilo closed 2 years ago
It's a bit annoying that the executables have to be listed individually. Perhaps placing them in a directory (e.g. bin
) would make this easier.
How do I automatically build them in a bin directory? If I can do that easily with classic make, sure.
I strongly resist the use of a meta-build tool such as cmake. Almost every time I've had to use it in somebody else's package I run into problems that require an hour of digging into its bowels to figure out some trivial error.
On 4/17/22 13:36, Clayton Smith wrote:
It's a bit annoying that the executables have to be listed individually. Perhaps placing them in a directory (e.g. |bin|) would make this easier.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ka9q/ka9q-radio/pull/5#issuecomment-1100945779, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJDI42XMJCG5METXAFNTKTVFRY5XANCNFSM5TULJN7A. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
Keep in mind I am still only barely literate with git, and right now I really don't want to have to learn more of it than I absolutely have to.
On 4/17/22 13:36, Clayton Smith wrote:
It's a bit annoying that the executables have to be listed individually. Perhaps placing them in a directory (e.g. |bin|) would make this easier.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ka9q/ka9q-radio/pull/5#issuecomment-1100945779, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJDI42XMJCG5METXAFNTKTVFRY5XANCNFSM5TULJN7A. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
How do I automatically build them in a bin directory? If I can do that easily with classic make, sure.
I had a look, and it doesn't seem to be easy. So I think things are fine as they are. Keeping a list of executables in .gitignore
isn't so bad.
Ignoring build artifacts will make it easier to work with git.