From owner-freebsd-current Mon Oct 5 00:44:38 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA25429 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:44:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.15.68.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id AAA25414 for ; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 00:44:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA01962; Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:44:02 +1000 Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 17:44:02 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199810050744.RAA01962@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au, mike@smith.net.au Subject: Re: Shouldn't 'make includes' install stand.h? Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, dmaddox@scsn.net Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >> `includes' is a private target in src/Makefile for installing [all] the >> includes. > >It isn't, and has not been for years. It might be meant to, which is a >different matter entirely. It's also broken by design (includes should >live with the code they describe). It's whatever the Makefile experts say it is. ---------------------------- revision 1.139 date: 1997/08/21 15:43:54; author: bde; state: Exp; lines: +8 -1 Added directories in the includes target so that it installs everything that a full install would (modulo bugs in rpcsvc/Makefile). The missing things weren't used (except for mp.h from libmp), but there are relatively few of them and it's easier to be complete. ---------------------------- Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message