Re: why does make install depend upon all?
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Tom Tromey wrote: Harald Please see subject. Of course I would agree that this Harald dependency is usually a good thing, but sometimes it might Harald be helpfull to do a 'make install' for another prefix e.g. Harald in your stow directory without verifying all the dependencies Harald again. This is traditional; there is no hard requirement for it in the spec, it is just the way things were done, at least in the GNU world as I understood it back then. If 'make install' does not depend on all, then it may misbehave since necessary dependencies may not be built. Regardless of unexpected side-effects (to the user), it is the technically correct thing to do. you're confusing expected (conventional) behavior with accuracy. If make all does all of the dependencies, and a subsequent make install uses those, a different convention of make all make install would also produce the desired result. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net
Re: why does make install depend upon all?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Thomas Dickey wrote: If 'make install' does not depend on all, then it may misbehave since necessary dependencies may not be built. Regardless of unexpected side-effects (to the user), it is the technically correct thing to do. you're confusing expected (conventional) behavior with accuracy. If make all does all of the dependencies, and a subsequent make install uses those, a different convention of make all make install would also produce the desired result. But this approach places the burden of correctness on the user. To extrapolate along the same lines, you could also expect the user to do make target1 make target2 make target3 make install but that doesn't make much sense. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Re: why does make install depend upon all?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: but that doesn't make much sense. still no: there are people who really do _not_ want make install to create new files (because that's the way they want to do installs). When they see it doing that, it's a bug. You're welcome to produce code the way you want it of course, but don't assume it's acceptable to other people. -- Thomas E. Dickey http://invisible-island.net ftp://invisible-island.net
Re: why does make install depend upon all?
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Thomas Dickey wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: but that doesn't make much sense. still no: there are people who really do _not_ want make install to create new files (because that's the way they want to do installs). When they see it doing that, it's a bug. A responsible person will do a 'make' prior to doing 'make install'. Unless there is a bug in the build process, or a filesystem problem, no additional files will be generated by the 'all' target during 'make install'. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Re: why does make install depend upon all?
Harald == Harald Dunkel [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Harald Please see subject. Of course I would agree that this Harald dependency is usually a good thing, but sometimes it might Harald be helpfull to do a 'make install' for another prefix e.g. Harald in your stow directory without verifying all the dependencies Harald again. This is traditional; there is no hard requirement for it in the spec, it is just the way things were done, at least in the GNU world as I understood it back then. Tom
why does make install depend upon all?
Hi folks, Please see subject. Of course I would agree that this dependency is usually a good thing, but sometimes it might be helpfull to do a 'make install' for another prefix e.g. in your stow directory without verifying all the dependencies again. It would be easy to split the old install target into new targets 'install' and 'install-again' (doing the unconditional install) without loosing functionality: install-again-am: @$(MAKE) $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) install-exec-am install-data-am install-am: all-am install-again-am .PHONY: install-again-am The targets 'install-again' and 'install-again-recursive' could be defined accordingly. Just a suggestion. Regards Harri
