Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of gbuild_simple ?

Stephan Bergmann <sbergman -AT- redhat.com>
Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:59:36 +0100

On 03/16/2012 03:47 PM, Matúš Kukan wrote:

3, No need to maintain gbuild_simple.

FWIW, in<http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=6e67c03dc0225fc66343546b14e902b9d238b1a3>"Enable -Wnon-virtual-dtor for GCC 4.6" I switched some CustomTargetMakefiles from including gbuild_simple.mk to plain gbuild.mk justrecently, as they referenced variables that are only defined in propergbuild.mk (gb_UnoApiTarget_CPPUMAKERTARGET). And that made me wonderwhat gbuild_simple.mk is actually necessary for, if anything.


Stephan

Context

[GBUILD] Can we get rid of gbuild_simple ? · Matúš Kukan
- Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of gbuild_simple ? · Stephan Bergmann
  - Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of gbuild_simple ? · Tor Lillqvist
- Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of recursively invoking custom targets ? · Michael Stahl
  - Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of recursively invoking custom targets ? · Matúš Kukan
    - Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of recursively invoking custom targets ? · Matúš Kukan
      - Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of recursively invoking custom targets ? · Norbert Thiebaud
  - Re: [GBUILD] Can we get rid of recursively invoking custom targets ? · Matúš Kukan

Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.