(bringing this to tech-userlevel)

Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <200101131912.f0DJC0a13336@saruman.ics.muni.cz>,
> Jarommr Dolecek <dolecek@ics.muni.cz> wrote:
> >Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >> This change is wrong. There *should* be a warning; all other makes produce
> >> a warning.
> >
> >Not until tree is warning free. I find it highly annoying to see
> >that warning all over place for tree build.
> 
> Still it is not fatal, and it will lead to people quickly fixing the problems.
> Your change makes the only choice to have the warning be fatal, so one cannot
> go through an uninterrupted build and then fix all the warnings that are
> present in the log file.

Yes. Mainly, the 'problem' lies in bsd.*.mk, since they define
targets (mainly) unconditionally. Should those be fixed ?

Jaromir
-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>      http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
@@@@  Wanna a real operating system ? Go and get NetBSD, dammit!  @@@@