Re: cvs-update

[Bill Wohler]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote:

> > Note that unlike autoloads target, the mh-autoloads target won't
> > actually do anything if none of the files in the mh-e directory have
> > changed. And it runs a whole lot faster.
> 
> Right, so maybe it should be in compile/recompile only and nowhere else.

I just removed it from bootstrap since bootstrap depends on compile
which depends on mh-autoloads.

I added mh-autoloads to compile-always to be consistent with the compile
target.

I did not remove mh-autoloads from updates since none of the targets of
updates already builds mh-autoloads and because I don't fully understand
the use of updates. However, it just occurred to me updates is for those
targets which take a long time to run and don't change often and
therefore are not recompile dependencies. If that's true, specifying
mh-autoloads as an updates dependency is essentially a no-op (since the
recompile target has likely been run recently) and might as well be
removed. Right? I'll do that, so as you say, mh-autoloads will only be a
compile/compile-always/recompile dependency.

-- 
Bill Wohler <address@hidden>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.