Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: [...] > It seems to me that the whole point of adding ‘patch’ as a (phony) > target is to allow a dependency on that target, [...]
Hello, Being used as dependencies of non-phony targets is the one thing phony targets are not useful for. A phony dependency is always out of date and will cause rerunning of the depending target. (I am pretty sure you knew that, and I am just misparsing.) I do not know what is wrong with having patch a phony target, though, phony target are fine for direct invocation (debian/rules patch) and that seems to be whole point of the respective entry in policy. cu andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
