This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at twcny dot rr dot com>
- To: dj at redhat dot com
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:23:50 -0500
- Subject: Re: re-re-re-re-re-re-configuring
>> And the reason I didn't do this was due to a different bug.
>> If libiberty is changed, then since
>> configure-bfd: configure-libiberty
>> configure-bfd: bfd/Makefile
>> bfd/Makefile won't be regenerated.
>But I tested that specific case, and it worked fine.
>I'll try it again. Full build twice, second time nothing happens.
>Remove libiberty/Makefile and "make" again...
>$ grep 'Configuring in' /tmp/foo
>Configuring in libiberty
>Configuring in opcodes
>Configuring in bfd
>Configuring in binutils
>Configuring in gas
>Configuring in ld
>Configuring in gprof
>Configuring in etc
>Configuring in utils
>Same thing if I just do "touch libiberty/Makefile".
>I wonder if it's something gnu-make specific.
>No, wait... bfd/Makefile depends on opcodes/Makefile, which then
>depends on libiberty/Makefile.
To second-guess myself :-)... I don't see that in the Makefile currently
in src and bib.
So maybe it does actually work? :-/ Can't imagine why it would, given
that I actually hit this problem in an earlier version.
>Ok, feel free to change all the configure:configure dependencies to
I will as soon as I can resolve a related problem which I just realized:
namely, the 'maybe' dependencies are phony and therefore will generate
the same problems. I have to use direct substitution, a la putting
So it might take a little bit...