On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 09:27:50AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 03:33:40PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 03 2022, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > > > * ab/make-bin-wrappers (2022-10-31) 4 commits > > > - Makefile: simplify $(test_bindir_programs) rule by splitting it up > > > - Makefile: rename "test_bindir_programs" variable, pre-declare > > > - Makefile: define "TEST_{PROGRAM,OBJS}" variables earlier > > > - Makefile: factor sed-powered '#!/bin/sh' munging into a variable > > > > > > Resolve issues with the bin-wrappers/% rules where "make > > > bin-wrappers/git" would generate the script but not "git" itself. > > > > > > Waiting for review. > > > source: <cover-v3-0.4-00000000000-20221031T222249Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > On my end I'm waiting to see what you and/or Jeff think about: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/221101.86edun5tgn.gmgdl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > I don't have any strong opinion on that. I read the v2 cover letter, was > skeptical/confused of the motivation, and didn't go much further. > > Your explanation in the linked email is that there are _other_ reasons > to do this refactoring, but I don't have any knowledge there that would > add to the review. My gut is still that building bin-wrappers/foo > doesn't need to depend on foo, but if it's one line, I don't care that > much either way. If it was 50 lines of complicated Makefile refactoring, > then would probably not be worth it. Isn't this topic exactly the latter? IOW: $ git diff --stat master...ab/make-bin-wrappers Makefile | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) ...maybe that was exactly your point ;-). TBH, I am not sold whatsoever on the premise of that series, and agree that plodding through 50+ lines of complicated Makefile diff is difficult to justify when the premise is hazy to me. Ævar, any strong objections against dropping this one? If there is a simpler way forward, I'm all ears, but in the meantime I find it difficult to justify the review time as-is. Thanks, Taylor