>> assuming, of course, that your source tree is in sync and that's the
>> only problem.  :)
>
>Of course, one could argue that it should always be possible to rebuild 
>make even in these circumstances.  That is, /usr/src/usr.bin/make/Makefile 
>should not pull in any makefile fragments, or there should be an alternate 
>makefile in that directory that doesn't rely on /usr/share/mk/*.

i think that being able to get away with

   $ cd /usr/src/usr.bin/make
   $ cc -omake -I. *.c */*.c

would probably make most people happy.  this can be discovered
experimentally by doing this:

   $ cd /usr/src/usr.bin/make
   $ cc -omake *.c
   [ it fails, lacking some symbols ]
   $ cc -omake *.c lst.lib/*.c
   [ it fails, lacking some header files ]
   $ cc -omake *.c lst.lib/*.c -I.

this is usually a good technique.

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."