httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dean Gaudet <dgau...@arctic.org>
Subject Re: bug in new Makefile
Date Thu, 21 Aug 1997 16:39:21 GMT
We already used libraries for regex and proxy, so I doubt it's a
portability problem. 

We could either generate libraries, or build an absolutely massive link
line ... I dunno.  I'm just looking at what other multi-directory
makefiles do. 

Dean

On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> >From the fingers of Paul Sutton flowed the following:
> >
> >On Mon, 18 Aug 1997, Dean Gaudet wrote:
> >> At any rate, doesn't this do everything, without caring what the modules
> >> directories build?
> >> 
> >> subdirs :
> >> 	for i in $(SUBDIRS); do \
> >> 	    ( cd $$i; $(MAKE) ) \
> >> 	done
> >
> >Ok, here is a cleanup for the new Configure. This now builds libraries for
> >all the subdirectories where it creates Makefiles (os/unix, core,
> >modules/*).
> 
>     This I don't like.  Why do libraries?  I'm very concerned that this
>     can cause problems on systems that don't do iterative loading.
> 
> >            There is no dependency from the top level makefile to the
> >libraries or other source files. Doing a make causes a make in each
> >sub-directory (os/unix, core, modules). The make in modules then does each
> >(configured) module directory.
> 
>     That's fine; so we end up with a no-op make in each directory.  Big
>     deal; we've done that ever since the modules/Makefile started being
>     generated.  But I don't understand the rationale for the libraries.
> 
>     #ken    :-)}
> 


Mime
View raw message