Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 08:56:17 -0700
From: Bill Currie <bill AT taniwha DOT org>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: newbie question involving InfoZIP source and DJGPP
Message-ID: <20001107085616.A17227@taniwha.org>
Mail-Followup-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
References: <20001106081659 DOT A14594 AT taniwha DOT org> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1001107123157 DOT 23845J AT is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1001107123157.23845J@is>; from eliz@is.elta.co.il on Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 12:32:15PM +0200
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 07, 2000 at 12:32:15PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> In a mature project, any changes to the Makefile usually mean you want
> to rebuild.  Adding files is not something you do a lot, once the
> baseline is established, and even if you do, "make -t" will prevent
> the old targets from being rebuilt unnecessarily.

Ok, this makes sense.

> In addition, "make clean" might be dangerous, if it removes files
> which are a pain to recreate (since "make clean" is not something
> people do very often, it might be buggy).

Hmm, well, I'm the sort that uses `make clean' alot, but that's not your point
:) IMHO, any file that's a pain to recreate should be a source file, not a
generated file :)

Bill
-- 
Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak