Symlink rewrite, [was: Re: [jamboost] Re: Milestone 4, preview 1]

From: Rene Rivera (grafik666_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-23 16:40:49

[2003-06-23] klapshin wrote:

>Hi, Volodya,
>
>> I'm not sure I understand. I plan that the above syntax will create
>only two 
>> symlinks: "hello_debug" and "hello_release" --- "hello_symlink" will
>be just 
>> a name of main target. Also, why should I call symlink rule twice? I
>don't 
>> see any reason yet....
>
>Well I guess I misunderstood your proposition. I thought you were
>suggesting to tweak symlink rule to allow <location> feature and use
>> > > symlink hello_symlink : hello :
>> > > <variant>debug:<location>hello_debug
>> > > <variant>release:<location>hello_release
>> > > ;
>in addition to regular symlink rule which creates 'hello_debug' and
>'hello_release' links. But apparently you are about to rewrite
>symlink, right? That would be perfect!

Some questions, because I forgot the answers... What's the difference
between <location> and <name> ? And therefore why use <location> instead of
<name> in this case?

And a question for Volodya... Would the current syntax of:

symlink hello_debug hellow_release : hello/<variant>debug
hello/<variant>release ;

Still need to be supported, or desired?

-- grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- rrivera (at) acm.org - grafik (at) redshift-software.com
-- 102708583 (at) icq