Charles Plessy <ple...@debian.org> writes: > Le Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 07:43:37PM +0200, Andreas Metzler a écrit : > > "patch" indeded is the standard way nowadays. See policy 4.9. > > Unfortunately, it seems that with quilt, it is better ot use > $(QUILT_STAMPFN) in order to avoid a target to become phony.
What's wrong with having a phony target? We already have many of them, and a standard way of dealing with them: as dependencies of the ‘.PHONY’ target. It seems to me that the whole point of adding ‘patch’ as a (phony) target is to allow a dependency on that target, instead of something patch-system-specific. What is your reasoning for wanting to diverge from that? -- \ “Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe | `\ or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.” —Arthur C. Clarke, | _o__) 1999 | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
