Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Oct 2015 21:38:08 -0700 | From | Darren Hart <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kselftest: replace $(RM) with rm -f command |
| |
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:16:53AM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > ----- On Sep 27, 2015, at 10:10 PM, Wang Long long.wanglong@huawei.com wrote: > > > Some test's Makefile using "$(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
| |