From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 22 20:59:54 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC6216A4CE; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:59:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.BAYAREA.NET [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D27B443D3F; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:59:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from [192.168.4.250] (dhcp50.pn.xcllnt.net [192.168.4.250]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j3MKwaI1042366; Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:58:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) In-Reply-To: <20050422203437.GB50191@ip.net.ua> References: <20050422.114615.71130404.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050422175324.GA32739@ip.net.ua> <20050422184922.GA41457@ns1.xcllnt.net> <20050422.125712.78748765.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050422200341.GA23926@ip.net.ua> <1b042838f6396ae9665fcb2f41f1c9a7@xcllnt.net> <20050422201615.GD23926@ip.net.ua> <20050422203437.GB50191@ip.net.ua> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v622) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <94969eabff134918730e7dcead17bb51@xcllnt.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Marcel Moolenaar Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 13:58:34 -0700 To: Ruslan Ermilov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.622) cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Warner Losh Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/config main.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 20:59:54 -0000 On Apr 22, 2005, at 1:34 PM, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: >>> I personally fail to see how this can be solved... :-( >> >> Ok, what about this: >> mkdep(1) creates lines of the form >> >> foo.o: foo.c inc1.h inc2.h >> >> Would this problem be solved if mkdep(1) created lines like: >> >> foo.o .depend: foo.c inc1.h inc2.h >> >> or equivalent? >> >> Would something else break if we do that? >> > I fail to see what this gives us, except for also breaking > "make .depend" when .depend is present and inc2.h disappears. True, there is a phase ordering problem. But isn't that something that can be worked around by making the necessary adjustments to make(1). The adjustments would be that if .depend is out of date, it is being made without making any sources that are out of date (or missing). This may require adding a special source to the mix of special sources that make(1) already has: .SOFTDEP or something like that. One can also hardcode this special case, but that seems ugly. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net