From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 30 20:58:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A3016A4E0 for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:58:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail3.speakeasy.net (mail3.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.203]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D9E943D5F for ; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:58:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 18372 invoked from network); 30 Aug 2004 20:58:35 -0000 Received: from dsl027-160-063.atl1.dsl.speakeasy.net (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) encrypted SMTP for ; 30 Aug 2004 20:58:34 -0000 Received: from [10.50.41.228] (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7UKvvMt045297; Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:58:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Tom Alsberg Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:56:19 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20040810223606.GA75648@lori.mine.nu> <20040815165330.GA4726@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <20040830192722.GA29212@zoopee.org> In-Reply-To: <20040830192722.GA29212@zoopee.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408301656.19394.jhb@FreeBSD.org> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on server.baldwin.cx cc: Geert Hendrickx cc: simon@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: make "quickworld"? (like in DragonFly) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 20:58:35 -0000 On Monday 30 August 2004 03:27 pm, Tom Alsberg wrote: > On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 09:53:30AM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 10:03:37AM +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote: > > > Does adding "NOCLEAN=true" to /etc/make.conf have the same effect? > > Just my two cents: > > Yes, but it's likely to attract flames because NOCLEAN does fail. If > > you forget it's in your make.conf there's a good chance you could report > > a bug that isn't a bug a waste a bunch of developer time. > > In that case, there is a bug though - namely, a bug in the Makefile. > Although this has happened to me in the past, it shouldn't happen in > normal circumstances. The idea of Makefiles, when writing them > correctly, is that only what's affected by a change -- but everything > affected by it -- will be rebuilt in case of a change. > > So there's no good reason for a make to fail unless something very odd > happened (with the timestamps, etc.) or something like this happens, > it means some dependency is missing, or some script external to the > Makefile did something wrong. That may be true for simple projects but this isn't a simple project. For example, when gcc was recently upgraded it changed the ABI for C++. Imagine if one had mismatched .o files for libstdc++ if some of the source files didn't change. That kind of dependency (on a compiler ABI) is not easily expressed in Makefilesm, and certainly not cleanly. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org