Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 00:09:47 -0800 (PST) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: ac199@hwcn.org Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Please review and test: new bsd.port.mk [OLD OLD OLD!] Message-ID: <199802030809.AAA23482@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980201231212.203B-100000@localhost> (message from Tim Vanderhoek on Sun, 1 Feb 1998 23:26:40 -0500 (EST))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Was there a reason that the new "distclean" was not combined with * "chained dependency cleaning"? If not, I'm sure a patch can be * cooked-up easily enough... Well, I for one would be mighty upset if I type "make distclean" in /usr/ports/net/tclplugin and lose the netscape tarball.... ;) * As it is, I think it's somewhat * confusing that distclean uses "chained dependency cleaning", but * is not itself chained. Good point. I always thought "distclean" calling "clean" is sort of unclean. (Pardon the pun.) Can we perhaps disassociate distclean and clean? * [A brief jaunt through the list archives turned-up nothing other * than a reminder that we still don't have what is possibly the * most-requested feature --- `make size' :-] Patches please? :) Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199802030809.AAA23482>