From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 13 01:22:00 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D6B716A41F; Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:22:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from pittgoth.com (ns1.pittgoth.com [216.38.206.188]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2913C43D46; Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:21:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (net-ix.gw.ai.net [205.134.160.6] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by pittgoth.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j9D1RidZ099970 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:27:45 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:20:46 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-Id: <20051012212046.25294564.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20051012.155811.52904801.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20051012170652.GI99170@submonkey.net> <20051012191933.GD75270@ip.net.ua> <20051012195808.GK99170@submonkey.net> <20051012.155811.52904801.imp@bsdimp.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, ceri@submonkey.net, ru@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/make make.1 X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 01:22:00 -0000 On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:58:11 -0600 (MDT) "M. Warner Losh" wrote: > In message: <20051012195808.GK99170@submonkey.net> > Ceri Davies writes: > : On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 10:19:33PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > : > On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 06:06:52PM +0100, Ceri Davies wrote: > : > > > From: Ruslan Ermilov > : > > > Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/make make.1 > : > > > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:27:10 +0300 > : > > > > : > > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:13:30AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > > > > > In message: <200510121009.j9CA9aE3026075@repoman.freebsd.org> > : > > > > > Yar Tikhiy writes: > : > > > > > : yar 2005-10-12 10:09:36 UTC > : > > > > > : > : > > > > > : FreeBSD src repository > : > > > > > : > : > > > > > : Modified files: > : > > > > > : usr.bin/make make.1 > : > > > > > : Log: > : > > > > > : __MAKE_CONF doesn't really belong here because it is > : > > > > > : a FreeBSD extension of sys.mk. A xref to make.conf(5) > : > > > > > : will be enough here. > : > > > > > : > : > > > > > : Requested by: ru > : > > > > > > : > > > > > I disagree. It is already hard enough to find info about __MAKE_CONF, > : > > > > > and since it is part of the base system, this seems like an artificial > : > > > > > distinction. > : > > > > > > : > > > : > > > > We really don't need any more duplication. > : > > > : > > That's true, but it should be our problem and not the user's. > : > > > : > It's not just that, it's that __MAKE_CONF isn't used/set/known > : > by the make(1) utility. It's a location of make.conf file that > : > is included by the default FreeBSD version of sys.mk. So if > : > we wanted to emphasize this, it'd be more logical to talk more > : > about make.conf(5) itself, what it is and how it's used in > : > FreeBSD. It can be a separate section, e.g. "FreeBSD sys.mk", > : > documenting __MAKE_CONF and probably other "make \ > : > __MAKE_CONF=/dev/null -f /dev/null -dg1" bits. Or it could be > : > a short explanation of what make.conf is and then a reference > : > to the make.conf(5) manpage. But it's certainly not the make's > : > internal variable (where it was initially documented), hence my > : > objection?to this commit. > : > : That's a convincing argument too. Perhaps this stuff belongs in mk(7)? > > sys.mk is described in make(1), so all things that affect it should be > described as well. If we ever have a mk(7), that might change, but > for now we really need it in make.1! Want my copy of mk.7? It certainly needs reviewed ... for being over a 1000 lines. -- Tom Rhodes