Re: make & SCCS evilness
"Bryan O'Sullivan" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.version-control.bitkeeper.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 22:27 +0100, Brendan Heading wrote: > hat part isn't the problem. My question is, how does it > work when you've got nested dependencies that make can't see ? Ah, I see. Yes, in that case, there's not much you can do. Either you can explicitly add the dependencies to your makefiles, keep your .d files under version control (either of which is horrible), or use some kind of wrapper setup like auto-bk-get. Good luck figuring out how to do something like that last one on XP. The only problem, from my perspective, with "checkout: get" on Unix boxes is that it makes "clone -l" no longer cheap; "clone -l" only hardlinks s.files, not g.files. <b _______________________________________________ Bitkeeper-users mailing list [email protected] http://bitmover.com/mailman/listinfo/bitkeeper-users To unsubscribe from this list, go to the above URL, follow instruction at the bottom of the web page.