Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID: <3E29F053.48A80004@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 00:24:51 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language: de,fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: djasm.txi?
References: <10301182127 DOT AA13863 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Charles Sandmann wrote:
[snip]
> With the current makefile structure I don't see any way to easily do
> -I (the .inf make rule is in the common file makefile.inc).

Maybe the rule in makefile.inc could be modified to be something like this:

    MAKEINFOFLAGS += --no-split

    $(INFO)/%.inf : %.tex
            makeinfo $(MAKEINFOFLAGS) $<

Then in src/utils/makefile you could add the -I flags:

   MAKEINFOFLAGS += -I$(TOP)/../dxe

(Not sure about the path there.)

> So should new include files go in their own directories with a ../ type
> include?
> 
> Should docs for go32-v2, stubify, stubedit, exe2coff be in ../stub ?
> Should docs for dxegen be in ../dxe ?

IMHO the docs should go with the code, as you suggest.

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]