Re: [ft-devel] ft2build.h being regenerated each time.

[Samuel Williams]

> however other tasks (like hacking with Freetype being one
subcomponent which happens to be hacked on; or having Freetype being
build by various toolchains) might plainly break if you do that. And I
guess you'll prefer a sub-efficient correct package over a
over-optimized broken one.

Can you give a use-case of this point? because I don't see how this could ever happen. If you are hacking on a sub-component, clearly something must change and thus can be tracked using the dependency tree. If in the case, you make a change, and something isn't recompiled, doesn't this imply the dependency tree is incomplete or incorrect? In which case, it doesn't matter what option you choose (sub-efficient or "over-optimised" as you put it), if your dependency tree is incorrect, the build will not function correctly.

On 10 April 2013 22:29, Antoine Leca <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi guys,

Samuel Williams wrote:
> The main issue, as demonstrated, is that the mtime of the file is not
> preserved. This means that build tools that depend on mtime (e.g. make)
> fail to work as efficiently as possible

Mmmh, the definition of 'efficiency' here is not as universal as you
might seem to think.
I agree some tasks might be made more efficient when mtime is preserved
or when "unnecessary" copying is skipped, like when building
distributions; however other tasks (like hacking with Freetype being one
subcomponent which happens to be hacked on; or having Freetype being
build by various toolchains) might plainly break if you do that. And I
guess you'll prefer a sub-efficient correct package over a
over-optimized broken one.

As a result, it seems to me that the as-shipped default should remain as
it is now, to preserve customary habits, to avoid bad surprises, and as
Werner said, since it is also the way everybody is doing it at large.


Antoine