[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OpenBSD 2.7
From: |
Pavel Roskin |
Subject: |
Re: OpenBSD 2.7 |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Dec 2000 13:57:14 -0500 (EST) |
Hello, Peter!
> > In general, Automake should add a dependency on config.status for every
> > file created by it.
>
> (The scripts are not created by config.status, but anyway...)
You are right. Perhaps I didn't sleep enough this night :-/
> Of course doing that is not a feasible option, so before long you're going
> to have to realize that complete dependencies are not practical. It
> sounds very absurd anyway if you make changes in the build system and
> expect the very same build system to recover from that.
Indeed, if I have a project in C and the version is hardcoded in one of
the object files, the executable will not be rebuilt when I touch
configure.in.
Doing otherwise would mean either rebuilding the whole project or
determining by some magic which object files have the version hardcoded.
> I.e., you might want to consider removing the explicit rule. How often
> does one change the version number?
I already suggested it, but with your arguments I feel much better about
doing so.
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/06
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Pavel Roskin, 2000/12/06
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/07
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Jim Meyering, 2000/12/07
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Pavel Roskin, 2000/12/07
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Lars Hecking, 2000/12/07
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Peter Eisentraut, 2000/12/07
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7,
Pavel Roskin <=
- Re: OpenBSD 2.7, Akim Demaille, 2000/12/07