Subject: Re: CVS commit: basesrc
To: Simon Burge <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/03/1999 18:14:37
On Sat, 4 Dec 1999, Simon Burge wrote:
> Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> > hmm. i certainly would leave it in there, since new dirs get added to
> > the source tree all the time, and i rarely if ever switch around to
> > using a different obj tree with the same source tree..
> I meant the same obj tree with different source trees. Ok, I agree that
> this might not be a common case. Is it easier to just not handle it?
Probably. Though couldn't you just fix things with a make obj when you
decide to use the new tree?
> It removes and re-creates the symlink (if you're using symlinks) for
> each obj directory. This is noticebly slow especially when using a NFS
> v2 fileserver for the source tree. To make things run faster, it'd be
> nice to have a clean-obj-includes or obj-clean-includes target, but this
> is obviously overboard.
Actually an "objdependall" target might be reall cool. Charles was telling
me what needs to happen for it, but I didn't do it. It seemed quite
> How about (leaving out all the .if/.endifs):
> make share/mk
> make cleandir
> make obj
> make share/tmac
> With this, any new tmac's get created in the tmac obj dir (if it exists)
> and not in the source directory, which is one thing I was trying to
> stop. In fact, because we build the libraries with MKMAN=no we could
> move the "make share/tmac" to after the libraries are built...
That would probably be good. :-)