[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: What is the logic behind make's handling of symbolic links?
From: |
Philip Couling |
Subject: |
Re: Fwd: What is the logic behind make's handling of symbolic links? |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Oct 2014 18:36:27 +0100 |
On 22 October 2014 15:07, Paul Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> You're correct that make doesn't care about the contents of files, but
> you're incorrect when you say that make is only concerned with the NAMES
> of files. Make is primarily concerned with the _MODIFICATION TIMES_ of
> files. Make decides when a file is newer or older by checking its
> modification time. The name of the file is only useful to make insofar
> as it allows make to find the target's modification time.
Agreed.
Point of interest: symbolic links have a modification time separate to
their referenced file.
> A file that doesn't exist does not have a modification time, and so make
> always considers that file to be out of date and rebuilds it.
>
This is again suggesting that dangling symbolic links don't exist. They
can be created, they do get created ergo they do exist. :-p
Point of interest: Dangling symbolic links still a modification time.
But I accept that make treats all links (dangling or otherwise) as
transparent.
I don't like it and would love to understand the reasoning behind that
decision, but it does at least explain make's logic neatly.
Thanks for that all.
That's what I was after.