On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Hubert Feyrer wrote:

> On Wed, 5 Jan 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> > 	This would hopefully make thinsg more maintainable also :)
> > 	What do people think?
> 
> Actually, I think that exactly the opposite will happen. We've already
> moved things out of bsd.pkg.mk, and they became ~unmaintained.
> 
	I was not aware of that - what did we move out?

> I know not enough about how make(1) works internally, but unless there's
> some hard prove this really buys us anything, i would prefer not to open
> this can of worms.

	A good example could be the code to generate README.html - its one
	shell command (with an embedded awk script), 49 lines, with no
	comments (due to the \ restriction). We could pull that out into a
	small, well documented shell script, which would take options on
	the command line and/or environment.

	The gain in splitting into 'modules':
		Scripts are easier to work on, could be run manually if wanted.
		The logic in the main .mk file is easier to follow.
		We can use comments in the scripts.

		David/absolute