Eric Wong <normalper...@yhbt.net> writes:

> Eric Wong <normalper...@yhbt.net> wrote:
>> So I'll hold off until we can fix the build regressions (working on it
>> now)
>
> OK, all fixed, all I needed was this (squashed in):
>
> --- a/perl/Makefile
> +++ b/perl/Makefile
> @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ clean:
>       $(RM) $(makfile).old
>       $(RM) PM.stamp
>  
> +$(makfile): PM.stamp
> +
>  ifdef NO_PERL_MAKEMAKER
>  instdir_SQ = $(subst ','\'',$(prefix)/lib)

Another thing I noticed but didn't say was that the top-level
Makefile seems to think without NO_PERL the way to regenerate
perl/perl.mak is to run perl/Makefile.PL, which is not true if the
build is done with NO_PERL_MAKEMAKER.

I do not offhand know why we even need to have dependency on
perl/perl.mak in the toplevel Makefile (other than "otherwise nobody
descends into perl/ and run make in it", which is a bogus
reason---there should be a rule to run "$(MAKE) -C perl/ $@" when
doing "make all" at the top-level if that is the case), but I think
at least the duplicated rule in the toplevel Makefile should read
something like:

        perl/perl.mak: ... (the dependencies) ...
                $(QUIET_SUBDIR0)perl ... (make variables) ... perl.mak

so that the real knowledge of how to rebuild it (with or without
NO_PERL_MAKEMAKER) should be in perl/Makefile.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to