On 2007-03-02 20:21:17 +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Karl Hasselström wrote:
>
> > However, given that your file timestamps have been bumped (without
> > file content changes),
>
> There were changes. Only that they have been taken back, but that is
> _another_ change.
Since the content is exactly the same as before, I'd be of the strong
opinion that nothing has changed as far as the make system should be
concerned. But this is getting off-topic, so I'll just agree to
disagree if you do. :-)
> > it's a performance bug in your make tool if this causes it to
> > needlessly rebuild half the known universe. (Fixing the bug by
> > using content hashes to detect changes may or may not be a good
> > trade-off, depending on your workflow.)
>
> Getting dependencies right is sometimes not very easy. I participate
> in projects which have _seriously_ broken dependencies. In these
> cases, I do a quick "touch source.c" to force a recompilation.
>
> You'd break this workaround.
>
> P.S.: yes, I know I could possibly find the object file and remove
> that, too. But finding the source is often easier.
Well, all you'd need is a way to tell the make system to flush its
caches for source.c (or some larger portion of the build, as
necessary). Such as "make-tool --flush-cache source.c".
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html