------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1446 --- Comment #3 from Heiko Schlittermann <hs+e...@schlittermann.de> 2014-02-26 23:04:54 --- Jeremy Harris <jgh146...@wizmail.org> (Di 25 Feb 2014 23:06:09 CET): > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You reported the bug. > > http://bugs.exim.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1446 > > Jeremy Harris <jgh146...@wizmail.org> changed: > > What |Removed |Added > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CC| |jgh146...@wizmail.org > Status|NEW |ASSIGNED > > > > > --- Comment #2 from Jeremy Harris <jgh146...@wizmail.org> 2014-02-25 > 22:06:08 --- > This doesn't look incorrect but we still have allexim depending on both > buildlookups and exim, when exim depends on buildlookups. Messy. I think, the problem isn't the multiple dependency on buildwhatever. Make is clever enough to sort this out. The problem is that there exists multiple "build paths" to targets like transports/transports.a, … one path via the phony buildtransports target, and the other one via the direct "transports/transports.a" target. > Presumably this derives from the introduction of the buildwhatever targets. > > > I'd be tempted to have > > buildlookups: lookups/lookups.a > lookups/lookups.a: config.h version.h > cd; make whatever > > and keep the buildwhatever targets as toplevel items only; not used for > internal nodes Yes, but this rises the question what for these targets are at all. To avoid this question, I've left them in place for the allexim target. :) -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.exim.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email -- ## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
