Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 12 Oct 2005 19:23:07 +0400
From:      Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To:        "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
Cc:        cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, yar@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/make make.1
Message-ID:  <20051012152307.GV14542@cell.sick.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20051012.091330.53066886.imp@bsdimp.com>
References:  <200510121009.j9CA9aE3026075@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051012.091330.53066886.imp@bsdimp.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:13:30AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
M> : yar         2005-10-12 10:09:36 UTC
M> : 
M> :   FreeBSD src repository
M> : 
M> :   Modified files:
M> :     usr.bin/make         make.1 
M> :   Log:
M> :   __MAKE_CONF doesn't really belong here because it is
M> :   a FreeBSD extension of sys.mk.  A xref to make.conf(5)
M> :   will be enough here.
M> :   
M> :   Requested by:   ru
M> 
M> I disagree.  It is already hard enough to find info about __MAKE_CONF,
M> and since it is part of the base system, this seems like an artificial
M> distinction.

I think that seeking __MAKE_CONF in make.conf(5) is straightforward.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051012152307.GV14542>