Re: make depend (Re: Coming attractions: VPATH build; make variables issue)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: make depend (Re: Coming attractions: VPATH build; make variables issue) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 9622.971975878@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | make depend (Re: Coming attractions: VPATH build; make variables issue) (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: make depend (Re: Coming attractions: VPATH build; make
variables issue)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > Just a sanity check: Does anyone use `make depend'? Does everyone know > about the better way to track dependencies? Does every-/anyone know why > `make depend' is worse? I just don't want to bother fixing something > that's dead anyway... > (helpful reading: http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/autodep.html) Well, you'll still have to touch every makefile :-( --- but I see no good reason not to remove "make depend" if we have support for a better solution. Comments anyone? One thought here: "make depend" has the advantage of being non-intrusive, in the sense that you're not forced to use it and if you don't use it it doesn't cost you anything. In particular, non-developer types probably just want to build from scratch when they get a new distribution --- they don't want to expend cycles on making useless (for them) dependency files, and they most certainly don't want to be forced to use gcc, nor to install a makedepend tool. I trust what you have in mind doesn't make life worse for people who don't need dependency tracking. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: