Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-29 Thread Bruce Evans
On Mon, 28 May 2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:31:58AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > [Someone wrote] > > > What was the reasoning for a serperate owner specification from BIN*? > > > > Simple orthagonality. Ie, each bsd.*.mk file typically has a seperate > > set o

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Rodney W. Grimes
> On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:31:58AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:22:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > > > This was on my TODO. The only problem with INCOWN/INCGRP not being > > > > > used here is that they were introduced long after include/Makefile. >

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:31:58AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:22:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > > This was on my TODO. The only problem with INCOWN/INCGRP not being > > > > used here is that they were introduced long after include/Makefile. > > > > >

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Rodney W. Grimes
> On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:22:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > This was on my TODO. The only problem with INCOWN/INCGRP not being > > > used here is that they were introduced long after include/Makefile. > > > > And perhaps one should go read the commit message that introduced them...

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:26:11AM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:22:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > This was on my TODO. The only problem with INCOWN/INCGRP not being > > > used here is that they were introduced long after include/Makefile. > > > > And perhap

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread David O'Brien
On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 10:22:33AM -0700, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > This was on my TODO. The only problem with INCOWN/INCGRP not being > > used here is that they were introduced long after include/Makefile. > > And perhaps one should go read the commit message that introduced them... > it was

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Rodney W. Grimes
> On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 03:06:00PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 02:59:22PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > > Shouldn't the includes/Makefile be installing headers using > > > INCOWN/INCGRP instead of BINOWN/BINGRP? I ran into this when trying > > > to do a 'make inclu

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-28 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 03:06:00PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 02:59:22PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > Shouldn't the includes/Makefile be installing headers using > > INCOWN/INCGRP instead of BINOWN/BINGRP? I ran into this when trying > > to do a 'make includes' as a

Re: 'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-26 Thread Kris Kennaway
On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 02:59:22PM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Shouldn't the includes/Makefile be installing headers using > INCOWN/INCGRP instead of BINOWN/BINGRP? I ran into this when trying > to do a 'make includes' as a normal user. Oops, hit send too soon; more changes are required of the

'make includes' ownership patch

2001-05-26 Thread Kris Kennaway
Shouldn't the includes/Makefile be installing headers using INCOWN/INCGRP instead of BINOWN/BINGRP? I ran into this when trying to do a 'make includes' as a normal user. Kris Index: include/Makefile === RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/inc