Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 12:22:17 +0600 From: Victor Snezhko <snezhko@indorsoft.ru> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 6.0-STABLE buildworld (possibly) broken ? Message-ID: <ud5kghvc6.fsf@indorsoft.ru> In-Reply-To: <20051201184703.GK20961@ip.net.ua> (Ruslan Ermilov's message of "Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:47:03 %2B0200") References: <1133397567.40645.5.camel@WarHeaD.OTEL.net> <20051201053543.GC36718@ip.net.ua> <1133436603.37980.9.camel@DraGoN.OTEL.net> <20051201175639.GH32006@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20051201184703.GK20961@ip.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> writes: >> This problem seems to come up fairly regularly. How about adding a >> check into make(1) so that if a dependency has a date in the future, >> make dies with more intuitive error? It would probably reduce the >> number of these questions if you got an error message like: >> "foo.c was created in the future. Check your system date/time." >> >> IMHO, that's a lot more obvious than: >> "/usr/obj/usr/src/tmp/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lc" >> or >> "... touch not found ..." >> > I considered doing this in make(1) a while ago, but have come > to a conclusion it's not quite safe. For example, I often > "cvs update" from remote repositories, and that sets modification > time to that of the repository machine (probably only if it's a > new file, I don't recall all the conditions now, or it might > have been NFS-mounted src/ or repo). We could add a flag such as NO_TIME_CHECK or so and check only if the flag isn't set. -- WBR, Victor V. Snezhko EMail: snezhko@indorsoft.ru
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ud5kghvc6.fsf>