Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 17:29:41 -0600 From: Nate Williams <nate@trout.sri.MT.net> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> Cc: terry@cs.weber.edu, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: new install(1) utility Message-ID: <199504042329.RAA08021@trout.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> "Re: new install(1) utility" (Apr 4, 2:52pm)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > And jamming make-like dependency capability into install is a
> > > cockamamy way to fix it.
> >
> > It has nothing to do with make-like dependency capabilities. With the
> > addition of that option, install now determines if it really needs to
> > install the files rather than blindly doing it no matter what.
>
> I think Terry means this:
>
> ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}${PROG}: ${.OBJDIR}/${PROG}
> install ${COPY} ${STRIP} -m ${BINMODE} -o ${BINOWN} -g ${GINGRP} \
> ${PROG} ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}
>
> install: ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}${PROG}
Ahh, but what if ${DESTDIR}${BINDIR}${PROG} was older than
${.OBJDIR}/${PROG} simply because it was deleted during a purge of
/usr/obj. My arguement is that it doesn't *need* to be installed
(especially in the case of libraries).
An include file change in one file will cause all of the libraries to
be re-compiled that depend on it, but it doesn't *necessarily* mean that
there were any changes in the library or it's functionality.
If the libraries don't differ at a binary level, there weren't any
changes, so they library doesn't need to be installed.
Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504042329.RAA08021>