Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A note. What appears in dependency lists actually are libraries
> from ${WORLDTMP}/usr/include, not /usr/include. Not very useful
> outside of "make buildworld", yeah?
Wrong. Try backing out the patch, then
# cd /usr/src/secure
# make obj && make d
On Sat, Mar 30, 2002 at 02:15:56PM +0100, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 12:28:17PM -0800, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > Log:
> > > Install static and profiled libraries with -C.
> > Um why, what's so special about them?
>
Ruslan Ermilov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 12:28:17PM -0800, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Log:
> > Install static and profiled libraries with -C.
> Um why, what's so special about them?
They appear in dependency lists. This was discussed on -arch.
DES
--
Dag-Erl
On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 12:28:17PM -0800, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> des 2002/03/22 12:28:17 PST
>
> Modified files:
> share/mk bsd.lib.mk
> Log:
> Install static and profiled libraries with -C.
>
> Revision ChangesPath
> 1.106 +2 -2 src/share
On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 11:05:01AM +, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 11:40:34AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
> >
> > > Might I advice some more time before we actually do something?
> > >
> > > What's all this rush-it-in before anyone can actually fix the larger
> > > prob
Josef Karthauser wrote:
> The reason for adopting a fall back solution it that it is not clear that
> setflags/getflags is the best choice of function name for manipulating
> file flags as it's a bit too generic a name. Whilst we're debating
> this point there's no point in having them as librar
On Fri, Feb 04, 2000 at 11:40:34AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
>
> > Might I advice some more time before we actually do something?
> >
> > What's all this rush-it-in before anyone can actually fix the larger
> > problem?
> >
> I'm positive about this as well.
>
The main reason for the backou
