<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 18:27, Michael Wild <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:themiwi@gmail.com">themiwi@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div id=":6pc">Tup was already discussed on this list quite some time ago. Using<br>
LD_PRELOAD to do those things makes my skin crawl.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Using an incorrect C preprocessor and needing to write a dependency generator for each language/dialect makes my skin crawl. :-)</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div id=":6pc">
I really like the concepts behind Tup, and it is blazingly fast, but<br>
that funky hijacking business makes me really uncomfortable. OTOH, if<br>
the author of Tup really can make it watertight, backed up by an<br>
extensive test suite which you can apply to your toolchain in order to<br>
be sure it works fine, I could get used to the idea ;-)</div></blockquote></div><br><div>My problem with Tup is not with the dependency analysis, but with out-of-source and partial builds. A few people have been asking for these things, and while Mike Shal (Tup's author) still seems unconvinced of their importance, I expect they will show up eventually.</div>