From owner-freebsd-current  Sat Jun 22 10:49:48 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id KAA22801
          for current-outgoing; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 10:49:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA22792
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 10:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id LAA16502; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:49:35 -0600
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:49:35 -0600
From: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199606221749.LAA16502@rocky.sri.MT.net>
To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Cc: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>, current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Wanted: Testers for an alternate to /usr/obj (as we know it). 
In-Reply-To: <10315.835465689@time.cdrom.com>
References: <199606221734.LAA16449@rocky.sri.MT.net>
	<10315.835465689@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > Umm, why would it be any different?  The symlink would be for the user
> > only.  The make system wouldn't even be aware of it's existance.  Again,
> > this is for *me* to be able to see the contents of the obj directory
> > easily.
> 
> Ah..  Well, we can worry about this as an optional enhancement later.
> It's not hard to create the symlink from the obj rule.

Cool.  In any case, I'd be willing to test it if that 'enhancement' was
in place.  :)


Nate