On Sunday 02 September 2001 10:28, Jim Winstead wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2001 at 01:25:07PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> > On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > Which means it has nothing to do with cleaning the tree to a
> > > distribution state (or state 'ready for distribution'.)
> >
> > See, I think that's the difference of interpretation here. *I* interpret
> > distclean to mean not "ready for distribution" but "back to essentially
> > the way it was when I unpacked the distribution". The difference being
> > that I'd be irritated as hell if I lost my configuration information
> > which has no impact on the "state" of the build environment, as opposed
> > to the Makefiles and so on which do affect the state. If I make
> > distclean, it means I want to start over again with the first step out of
> > the tarball, namely configure. It doesn't mean I want to lose the
> > options I passed to configure.
>
> it may be worth following the gnu project's lead on these targets,
> since they use the same names.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards_55.html#SEC55
>
> (for them, distclean == what is in the tarball.)
+1. If we are going to use their syntax, we should also use their
semantics. I will check with some other packages later today to see
what they do with make distclean.
Ryan
______________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------
