Should $(OBJS): Makefile be there?

[sameer <sa...@c2.net>]

	This is clearly not a proposed change for 1.2. I'm wondering,
however, if this really should be there..

Makefile.tmpl has the line:

$(OBJS): Makefile

	so that if the Makefile is modified, all the .o files need to
be rebuilt... 

	Seems to me, however, that the only dependency should be

httpd: $(REGLIB) $(OBJS) Makefile

	because if Makefile gets modified it only affects which object
files go in, not the contents of the individual object files. If you
run "Configure" the only thing that changes is modules.c, which means
that a new modules.o needs to be built, but no other object files need
to be rebuilt.

	Is that right? Am I missing something?

-- 
Sameer Parekh					Voice:   510-986-8770
President					FAX:     510-986-8777
C2Net
http://www.c2.net/				sameer@c2.net

Re: Should $(OBJS): Makefile be there?

[ra...@bellglobal.com]

>      This is clearly not a proposed change for 1.2. I'm wondering,
> however, if this really should be there..
> 
> Makefile.tmpl has the line:
> 
> $(OBJS): Makefile
> 
>      so that if the Makefile is modified, all the .o files need to
> be rebuilt... 
> 
>      Seems to me, however, that the only dependency should be
> 
> httpd: $(REGLIB) $(OBJS) Makefile
> 
>      because if Makefile gets modified it only affects which object
> files go in, not the contents of the individual object files. If you
> run "Configure" the only thing that changes is modules.c, which means
> that a new modules.o needs to be built, but no other object files need
> to be rebuilt.

Well, someone could modify the Makefile and add, for example, -DSTRONGHOLD
to the EXTRA_CFLAGS line.  In that case you would need to regenerate all
the .o files.  I do agree with you that having the .o files dependant on
the Makefile is a hassle.  It is always the first thing I change when I
grab a new version of Apache.

-Rasmus