From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13139 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2002 01:05:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 13124 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 01:05:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com) (66.187.233.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 01:05:34 -0000 Received: from free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (aoliva2.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.1.156]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id gBA15JN32083; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 20:05:19 -0500 Received: from free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id gBA15IZP026849; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:05:18 -0200 Received: (from aoliva@localhost) by free.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id gBA15H6T026845; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:05:17 -0200 To: Nathanael Nerode Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com, dj@redhat.com Subject: Re: (patch) configure-configure -> Makefile-Makefile References: <20021209001117.GA12061@doctormoo> From: Alexandre Oliva Organization: GCC Team, Red Hat Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 17:21:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20021209001117.GA12061@doctormoo> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00308.txt.bz2 On Dec 8, 2002, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > OK, this converts a bunch of the configure-configure dependencies to > Makefile-Makefile dependencies. It leaves the ones which require 'maybe'ing. I'd much rather have Makefile-Makefile dependencies only when they're strictly necessary. I'm not even sure we actually want bfd/Makefile to depend on libiberty/Makefile. Even though we know bfd/Makefile takes info from libiberty/Makefile, I'd rather not have to regenerate bfd/Makefile just because libiberty/Makefile changes. With this change, it seems to me that just touching libiberty/Makefile would cause the entire tree to be reconfigured. I don't like this. I'd love to learn I'm mistaken. -- Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer