On 08/23/2016 04:37 PM, Jeff Law wrote: > On 08/23/2016 03:19 AM, Pedro Alves wrote: >> On 08/23/2016 02:55 AM, Patrick Palka wrote: >>> >>> Any reason why automatic dependency generation is not used for the >>> build/*.o objects too? >> >> Historic. Tromey had a big patch a long while ago that made >> everything be covered by auto dependencies. That turned out to >> trickle some GNU make bug and was backed out. Later on, a more >> incremental approach was taken, and that left out build/*.o objects >> for starters: >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-07/msg00242.html >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01218.html >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-07/msg01386.html >> >> I couldn't find the original patch, but it's in the lists >> somewhere. > ISTM we ought to try and rectify the dependency situation for the build > bits. The haphazard way we've managed dependencies may have made sense > in 1992, but doesn't today... > Jeff
I can't imagine how would anyone disagree. :-) Maybe Tromey had some follow up patches (or ideas). Adding him now. Thanks, Pedro Alves
