In message <Pine.NEB.3.93.970108150718.26885H-100000@cynic.portal.ca>, cjs@port
al.ca writes:
>
>It's ocurred to me that, since we're thinking about changing the
>build process anyway, it might be worthwhile abandoning the symlinks
>in the source tree altogether. It would work like this:
>
>If we are in BSDSRCDIR:
>
>* If BSDOBJDIR is not set, we print a warning.
>
>* If it is set, we first try to build in ${BSDOBJDIR}.${MACHINE_ARCH}.
>If that doesn't exist, we try ${BSDOBJDIR}. If that fails too, we
>print an error and die. As well as absolute paths, appropriately
>modfied with the current path with $BSDSRCDIR removed, we would
>allow relative paths and build directly there, without referring
>to BSDSRCDIR at all.
>
>* `Make obj' would still make the object tree based on ${BSDOBJDIR},
>but would not make symlinks in the source tree.

I think it would be even nicer if you didn't have to do `make obj' at
all, but rather have make create the (sub)directories as necessary.

	[ ... ]

>This would also let us build from read-only source trees that don't
>have the appropriate obj directories already in them.
>
>What are the disadvantages of this scheme?

None! :-)

	- MH
--
Magnus Holmberg, ux-help			     mho@era-a.ericsson.se
Tel 71713						mho@stacken.kth.se