Re%3A%5BPATCH%5D%20document%20the%20use%20of%20stamps%20in%20gcc%2FMakefile.in

[Geoff Keating <geoffk at geoffk dot org>]

(I seem to have destroyed the tab-indenting in the original message.   
Fortunately I had no problems with it...)

> 2005-10-24  Rafael Ávila de Espíndola  <rafael.espindola@gmail.com>
>
>                   * gcc/Makefile.in: Documented the use of stamps
> Index: gcc/Makefile.in
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/Makefile.in,v
> retrieving revision 1.1547
> diff -u -3 -p -u -r1.1547 Makefile.in
> --- gcc/Makefile.in 12 Oct 2005 12:38:00 -0000 1.1547
> +++ gcc/Makefile.in 24 Oct 2005 16:32:47 -0000
> @@ -1088,6 +1088,39 @@ endif
>  # Rebuilding this configuration
>  # -----------------------------
>
> +# On the use of stamps:
> +# if a target "a" depends on "b", one usually writes
> +# a: b
> +# command b -o a
> +#
> +# but if "a" doesn't change every time "b" changes, it would the  
> nice if targets that
> +# depend on "a" wouldn't be rebuild unnecessarily. To make this,  
> "a" must not be
> +# overwritten with a identical copy. One solution is to use a  
> temporary file
> +# a:b
> +# command b -o a.temp
> +# move-if-change a.temp a

I think it would help the reader a lot if this used the actual  
correct move-if-change line, something like

        $(SHELL) $(srcdir)/../move-if-change tmp-mlib.h multilib.h

in each place.

Otherwise, this looks good, could you re-send it with that change?

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature