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

Re: do I really need "make-kpkg clean"?

Manoj Srivastava wrote:

On Thu, 05 May 2005 00:13:00 +0200, Roel Schroeven
<rschroev_nospam_ml@fastmail.fm> said:

Makefiles are meant to deal with changes in the code itself, not
with changes in config options. Make just looks at dependencies and
file dates, not at the contents of those files. When you change a
config option, a define is changed in a file that lots of other
files have a dependency on, so all those files (and files that
depend on it, and so on) are rebuilt.

I think thiss a big drawback of make; one way to minimize the
problem is using ccache.

        I think this is a drawback in your understanding of
 make. config files can, and do, just as easily appear in the
 dependency graph that make considers before taking action. This is
 not a make capability issue.

They can appear there, but if a config file is changed, *all* files that depend on that file are rebuilt, not only those that are affected by the change in the config file. I admit that I don't know exactly how this is handled in the kernel, maybe they have found a better way to do it there.

If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood
on the shoulders of giants.  -- Isaac Newton

Roel Schroeven

Reply to: