On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 02:44:00PM +0100, Gavan Fantom wrote:

> > Ouch that's a even nastier manifestation of the some problem I suppose.
> > I dare to say that the culprit is tools.mk ;)
> 
> tools.mk suffers the same problem, but the culprit here is
> gcc.buildlink2.mk.
>
> I'm thinking through a more generic solution, but for now I think this is
> the right answer.

I haven't had a chance to test the patch and debug this further,
but it seems to be the right way - we shouldn't allow a dependency loop
to occur at all. this should have been tested more, mea culpa.

thanks for looking at it.

grant.