>>>>> "Rich" == Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rich> What do you want to find out that you couldn't get by tracking
Rich> *make and its descendant processes, down to whatever level you
Rich> desire? Are there parts of *make's "reasoning" you'd like to
Rich> understand or is this just a matter of convenience?
Rich> Perhaps with a use case or two to consider, folks may be able
Rich> to make appropriate suggestions.
Sure, consider this example:
foo: bar
cd foobar; make
What I will see by looking at child processes is make in foobar. What
I'd like to know is that we went there because of foo:bar dependency.
Also suppose that the foo target is not rebuilt because foo is touched
later than bar. We will not see any child processes for that but it
would be useful to know that the target was actually considered.
- akolb
_______________________________________________
dtrace-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
