Hi -- more of a random thought,

It'd be pretty a pretty nifty Squeak package which could run the 
compilation tools directly (i.e. call gcc like an IDE) to recompile itself. 
 Keeping track of file modification times and other dependencies.

-rj


On Wednesday, December 09, 1998 9:48 AM, Blanchard, Tod 
[SMTP:tod.blanchard at kanisa.com] wrote:
> No, but projects are closed, non-portable, and have short life 
expectancies.
> I run into the "wrong version" issue all the time and if I have to move 
the
> code elsewhere I still have to write a makefile.  Project manager should
> write makefiles.
>
> Also, large projects should be developed as a system of sub projects each
> with its own makefile.  I actually have two types of makefiles - module
> makefiles and project makefiles (which just call module makefiles).  I'm
> gonna stay pro-makefile and anti-closed file format.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Ken Dickey [SMTP:kend at apple.com]
> > Sent:	Tuesday, December 08, 1998 4:37 PM
> > To:	squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> > Subject:	RE: Makefiles [was: building Mac 2.3b VM]
> >
> > >And yet Makefiles are what MacOS X and WebObjects people use to manage
> > >development.
> >
> > I didn't say I don't use makefiles.  But having built large projects
> > (e.g. Sun's JDK) using both makefiles and Metrowerks projects, I find 
the
> > latter much easier to use.  They both have problems, but assuming
> > makefiles are easy and projects are hard is a little much.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -KenD
>