Documentation cleanup issues

[bill davidsen]

In article <yl1y4yxry4.fsf at windlord.stanford.edu>,
Russ Allbery  <rra at stanford.edu> wrote:

| I'm torn over which is the better installation method, the explicit loop
| or the dependency method that most of INN uses.

Well, if you define members of a list, like
  nnrpdoc = foo.1 mumble.8 bar.4

and then don't have a rule for it, make will complain. I think that's
good.

Would a submake help to avoid having a lot of rules?
  for n in $(LIST1) $(LIST2); do make $$n; done

Hum, I can't think of exactly how to do this, although combined with
some make rules it might. I haven't done anything the least bit tricky
with any make but Linux in a few years, I dumb down anything portable.
There's a neat SysV make feature which would help, but (a) it's not
portable either and (b) I can't remember exactly how it worked. I used
it in a package I developed on SBR4 and "portability tested" on SCO
OpenDesktop, which failed totally in BSD. That was about 1991, to give
you an idea how well I remember the details ;-(
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.