Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc
Stefan Neis <neis-RCUrBZHvLvKSHq+C5vT0LZQlNPQFfrerqZSUQi4AVrg@public.gmane.org> Thu, 10 Jul 2003 09:52:15 +0200 (CEST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.ide.emx.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <Pine.GSO.4.21.0307100951120.5075-100000@cdc-ultra4.cdc.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> |
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Ilya Zakharevich wrote: > On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 05:10:15PM +0200, Stefan Neis wrote: > > > a) I know of no issue with 2.8.1 + dmake (but of course, this may be > > > just ignorance). > > > > While I agree, the problem is that whatever new source one adds (e.g. > > Posix/2), it won't be happy with dmake. While mixing two different makes > > is certainly possible, it's also possibly confusing. > > ??? Why adding a couple of new C files would require a change of $MAKE? Personally, I'd like at least seeing Posix/2 being added into libc. That's close to 300 source files ... Regards, Stefan -- Micro$oft is not an answer. It is a question. The answer is 'no'.