[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Problems with build target



Hi,
>>"Martin" == Martin Schulze <joey@kuolema.Infodrom.North.DE> writes:

>> It makes make ignore files of the same name as a .PHONY: dependent.

Martin> Aha, I didn't know that .PHONY does.  If that's the case maybe
Martin> every rules file that has a build target and uses the file
Martin> build as stamp file needs to have such a .PHONY entry.  At
Martin> least it sounds ok.

	I think I disagree. Think about large packages, or packages
 that do complex things (mailagent, Perl, latex2html) each run time
 consuming tests, or create documentation from scratch, etc. I guess
 we should either use pattern runes or separate targets, but I prefer
 the upstream makefiles, which, often, do not have this granularity.

	In case of suboptimal upstream makefiles, the build is done
 over and over again. I think theis is a toss p; on some packages it
 may be correct to rebuild every tinme (as the Makfiles are good); in
 others, an explicit action (rm -f biold) should be enough.

	I think we should decide this on a case by case basis.

	manoj
-- 
 "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't
 realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
 Calvin
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


Reply to: