[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 52-factored-install.patch
From: |
Tom Tromey |
Subject: |
Re: 52-factored-install.patch |
Date: |
23 Feb 2001 18:11:52 -0700 |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Tromey <address@hidden> writes:
Tom> 2. Pushing the hook out means that if the user has a -local as
Tom> well as a -hook then we have to rewrite the -local target to add
Tom> a new dependency. We've never rewritten user targets, so this is
Tom> a major(-ish) change to contemplate.
This is backwards -- we'd actually have to rewrite the user's -hook to
depend on -local (and other targets).
It gets worse if we want to support a pre-install (and pre-uninstall)
hook, which we do.
Tom
- 52-factored-install.patch, Akim Demaille, 2001/02/21
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Tom Tromey, 2001/02/21
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Akim Demaille, 2001/02/23
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Tom Tromey, 2001/02/24
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, akim, 2001/02/24
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Akim Demaille, 2001/02/25
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Tom Tromey, 2001/02/25
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Akim Demaille, 2001/02/25
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, Tom Tromey, 2001/02/25
- Re: 52-factored-install.patch, akim, 2001/02/25