From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Jun 28 23:07:24 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA09589
          for current-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:07:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id XAA09584
          for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 1996 23:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id QAA26436; Sat, 29 Jun 1996 16:01:44 +1000
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 16:01:44 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199606290601.QAA26436@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: bde@zeta.org.au, jkh@time.cdrom.com
Subject: Re: Building inside of /usr/src?
Cc: current@freebsd.org, nate@mt.sri.com, rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com,
        scott@statsci.com
Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>Hmmm.  So to answer my earlier question, if I put this functionality
>back into make (and again, I have absolutely NO problem with this)
>it's acceptable for us to say that anyone munging PWD deserves to
>lose?

No, at least if you consider the shell setting PWD to be munging it.
`cd /usr/src/bin/cat; make obj' would lose.  This can be fixed by using
/bin/pwd instead of ${.CURDIR} and a subsitution on ${.CURDIR} instead
of ${.TARGETDIR} in bsd.obj.mk.  You still have to worry about following
"../" paths in makefiles.  I guess there is no problem provided the
source and object trees don't contain any internal symlinks.  "../"
paths shouldn't be used to go above the trees!

Bruce