cargo-make VS run

cargo-make aims to be an extensive Rust-written task runner that additionally lets you define workflows to execute your tasks. You can install it using cargo install cargo-make.

You might be interested in cargo-make, which is based on TOML, or Just, which has a syntax that is vaguely inspired by Make but much less weird sigils and more suited to non-file-based tasks.

I would like to rewrite this project in Rust, but I am not so familiar with Cargo as I am with Make. Is it possible to declare these kinds of rules and targets ? Should I use a build script, a custom tool like cargo-make or something else ? What do you think ?

I use just myself, and I personally don't want projects' codebase to decide when something gets cargo installed on my system. For people who feel that's more acceptable, I'll note that cargo-make has first class support for the idea of expressing a task that depends on a cargo plugin:

Thank you for the help, created ticket #787 and #788!

https://github.com/sagiegurari/cargo-make

I ended up using it over just because it felt easier to use cross platform, and toml seemed like a right choice

cargo make is used pretty extensively in Bottlerocket OS

Cargo is a pretty robust build tool on it's own, but for that extra automated workflow oomph, I also use cargo-make

I've been using Run [0] for this purposes.

[0]: https://github.com/TekWizely/run

To the extent that posts like these evolve into discussing the merits of Make as a task runner, I would like to offer my tool for review:

* https://github.com/TekWizely/run

I built it to feel like make, but be better at managing tasks and wrappers.

If you are evaluating task runners and appreciate the simplicity of Make's syntax, I hope you'll give Run a try.

I invite you take a look at Run, a similar tool that I maintain:

* https://github.com/TekWizely/run

Support for including other Runfiles was recently introduced, with support for globbing and the ability to indicate if an error should be generated if no files are found.

Unrelated to this topic, I invite you take a look at my project which a tool purpose-built to be a better version of what your makefile became:

Run: Task runner that helps you easily manage and invoke small scripts and wrappers

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

Defining commands feels like make, but comes with a bunch of extras targeted at the needs of a task-runner.

I hope you'll check it out!

This looks like an interesting way to manage scripts globally. I could even see it able to manage n-sub-commands deep (vs usual "command sub-command" - maybe it already does?) by just trying to resolve each argument as a dir until you find a script to execute.

If you're interested in ways to better-manage small scripts and wrappers more locally, please take a look at my project, Run:

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

For those looking for a powerful task runners that feel like a makefile, please take a look at Run:

https://github.com/TekWizely/run

It's better a managing and invoking tasks and generates help text from comments.