On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:16:53AM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Sep 27, 2015, at 10:10 PM, Wang Long long.wanglong@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > Some test's Makefile using "$(RM)" while the other's > > using "rm -f". It is better to use one of them in all > > tests. > > I agree that this disparity appears to be unwanted. We > should settle on one or the other. > > > > > "rm -f" is better, because it is less magic, and everyone > > konws what is does. > > "$(RM)" is clearly defined as a Makefile implicit variable > which defaults to "rm -f". > Ref. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Implicit-Variables.html > > Leaving it as a variable is more flexible because then the > default behavior can be overridden if need be, which is > not the case of a hardcoded "rm -f". > > Following your line of argumentation, we should then > invoke "gcc" directly in every Makefile because it is > less magic than "$(CC)". This makes no sense. I don't think they can be compared so simply. Specifying a compiler is a common use case. Customizing the rm command is not, in my experience anyway, and like Michael, I would definately have to look up what RM means. That said, I care more about consistency than which is used. Both are valid, but $(RM), while more flexible, will cost more people time to look up what it does as it isn't commonly used than any benefit we're likely to see from its use. Meh. :-) -- Darren Hart Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
