From owner-freebsd-current Tue Oct 13 00:14:06 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA12127 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:14:06 -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 AAA12122 for ; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 00:14:03 -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 RAA21592; Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:13:46 +1000 Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 17:13:46 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199810130713.RAA21592@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, jb@cimlogic.com.au Subject: Re: gnu/usr.bin/cc/cc_tools/Makefile bug? (was Re: filesystem safety and SCSI disk write caching) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >} > and they happen to come out correct. If we don't want to rely on luck, >} > then this Makefile should have a separate rule for each of these .h files. >} >} Can this wait until the possible/probable (?) compiler upgrade after 3.0? > >Probably, though a caution sign should probably be posted until it is >fixed. It's easier to just fix it. Splitting the rules is obviously safe since it is essentially a no-op for -j1. All rules that build multiple targets may have the same problem. Some have been fixed by using .ORDER, but this is ugly , and it isn't necessary unless the command[s] that build the files need to built them all together. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message