Re: [PATCH 2/3] make: delete XDIFF_LIB, add xdiff to LIB_OBJS

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 2, 2025, 13:31 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq1pnlzayy.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <aN4R51_j2ieF-sjy@pks.im>

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 06:02:27PM +0000, Ezekiel Newren via GitGitGadget wrote:
>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> index e8fad803be..d89ba03286 100644
>> --- a/Makefile
>> +++ b/Makefile
>> @@ -1397,8 +1396,7 @@ XDIFF_OBJS += xdiff/xmerge.o
>>  XDIFF_OBJS += xdiff/xpatience.o
>>  XDIFF_OBJS += xdiff/xprepare.o
>>  XDIFF_OBJS += xdiff/xutils.o
>> -.PHONY: xdiff-objs
>> -xdiff-objs: $(XDIFF_OBJS)
>
> The removal of the `xdiff-objs` target isn't mentioned or justified in
> the commit message. I personally don't mind that this target goes away,
> as I don't really have a use case for it anyway. But in theory it could
> continue to exist. So I'd either retain it, or explain why it goes away.
>
> In case it goes away, is there still a reason to have the separate
> XDIFF_OBJS variable? Can't we add these objects to `LIB_OBJS` directly?

Doing it this way lets us still keep the "logical" organization to tell which object is which, even though we may lose physical distinction by throwing all objects in a single library archive.

Incidentally this would slightly reduce the patch noise and make the result more merge friendly when other topics are in flight that touch these (like adding a new file or two to REFTABLE_OBJS), but with the movement of these lines in [1/3], that benefit is diminished.