On 3/20/07, Peter Memishian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > ppsym.c => ppsym and probe.sh => probe > > > > > > > > In that case, it seems odd to check `probe' in under SCCS control, right? > > > > > > Depends... we already have a couple of "intermediate files" (like the > > > results of the "iffe"-probes) in the tree... > > > > What would one use the checked-in "probe" for? > > In theory it could be used to update the list of CPP symbols set by > default (Ok, it's unlikely that we have to look at this before OS/Net > switches to Sun Studio 12 (and the current codebase compiles with Studio > 12EA without problems (which means there isn't anything we have to worry > about (I've spend the last couple of hours testing that...)))). ... and that cannot be done by rebuilding "probe" from the checked-in sources?
This is dependent on the target operating system. probe.sh => probe may just be a copy on some targets but others may require a more complex process. Solaris just requires a plain copy but you don't include the Mamfiles which tell the users about this relationship. IMO you have two options: Either ship files which are generated during the ast-open build or ship the Mamfiles to instruct users how they can create the files themselves. Irek _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
