Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Request: support recursive lookup of checkmake.ini #101

Open
Integralist opened this issue Jul 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Request: support recursive lookup of checkmake.ini #101

Integralist opened this issue Jul 10, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Integralist
Copy link

Expected behaviour

I was hoping the checkmake tool would recursively check for checkmake.ini

e.g. if the current directory (containing a Makefile) has a checkmake.ini then that is used, but if not, move to the parent directory and check for checkmake.ini there, and so on until you reach the user's home directory where most people have configuration files.

Also, the ability to specify a location like ~/.config/checkmate.ini would be cool

Actual behaviour

It only checks the current directory.

Output of checkmake --version

checkmake 0.2.1 built at 2022-10-11T09:52:39Z by Integralist <[email protected]> with go version go1.18.5 darwin/arm64

Output of checkmake --debug <your makefile>

N/A

Output of make --version

N/A

Sample Makefile to reproduce issue

N/A

@mrtazz
Copy link
Owner

mrtazz commented Jul 10, 2024

Thanks for opening an issue. You can absolutely specify the location of a config file when executing checkmake (see https://github.com/mrtazz/checkmake?tab=readme-ov-file#usage).

For the automatic lookup I'll have to think about it. I've often found it confusing when tools do this because it's a set of implicit assumptions that aren't necessarily clear and make debugging harder. Maybe if there is a way to ask which config file is used that would make it better. I'll think about.

@rurban
Copy link

rurban commented Aug 23, 2024

See PR #104 for a ~/checkmake.ini fallback

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants