Re: [PATCH 1/1] Makefile: use `git ls-files` to list header files, if possible

From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Date: Mar 6, 2019, 00:23 UTC
Message-ID: <42d125d4-76bf-afc3-8f12-a9fa1296c85c@ramsayjones.plus.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190305230723.GB22901@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On 05/03/2019 23:07, Jeff King wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 02:50:11PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
>> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>>
>>> This makes sense to me, though as you noted elsewhere, it doesn't fix
>>> the gcrypt problem, since that file unconditionally wants to look at the
>>> system gcrypt.h (and we control at the Makefile level whether we
>>> actually look at sha256/gcrypt.h).
>>
>> Hmm, is that because the header check target does not know which *.h
>> files we ship are actually used in a particular build?
> 
> Yes, exactly.
> 
>> After a normal build, with dynamic dependency checking on, we would
>> have sufficient information to figure it out.  Would that help?
> 
> Yeah, that's what I was hinting at earlier in the thread. Here it is
> sketched out to an actual working patch. The sub-make bits could
> actually be a shell script instead of a Makefile; the only point in
> using make is to use the parent "-j" for parallelism.

sigh. :(

I wish my patch removing this target had been picked up now!

Earlier this evening I spent an hour or so writing an email which tried to discourage spending any time on this, because of the potential for this to be a huge time-suck. An unrewarding one at that! :-D

The email was actually prompted by someone mentioning 'dynamic compiler dependencies', because that's how it always starts ...

I deleted that email (it's not in my drafts folder anyway) because, in the end, it is not up to me to say how people should spend their time.

So I won't! :-D

ATB, Ramsay Jones