cvs commit: hugs98/src version.h.in Makefile.in version.h

[Jeffrey R Lewis]

On Wednesday 09 October 2002 12:10 pm, Ross Paterson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:09:13AM -0700, Jeffrey R Lewis wrote:
> > On Friday 04 October 2002 02:56 am, Ross Paterson wrote:
> > > Wouldn't it be better if version.h were generated by configure rath=
er
> > > than make?  And if you used the 3-letter month name, there'd be roo=
m
> > > for RC1 etc.
> >
> > If it were generated by configure, it would most certainly be out of
> > date most of the time (but perhaps you re-run configure more than I d=
o
> > ;-).
>
> I see your point.  Still, your scheme has a couple of defects:
> - if anything is changed, hugs.c and server.c get recompiled
> - if only those two are changed, the version number is unaffected
>
> How about a little version.c with nothing in it but a getVersion()
> function, and making that depend on everything else?

C'mon, Ross, admit it, ya just like pickin' nits ;-)  Don't worry, we lov=
e ya for it.

Your first point is of course correct, but is purely an optimization.  If=
 the shoe pinches, your suggestion of creating version.c is the way to go=
=2E

Your second point is just plain wrong.  If I touch hugs.c, and type `make=
', the version gets regenerated.

--Jeff