From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
References: <20130323100519.GA3980@polynum.com>
	<C9DC5E89-066D-484B-BE3C-9089C05DFF38@lsub.org>
	<CAKzdPgzpf9e6fVMjxKp9zjXZ9xxVaVgPpz6bbqCAg=EiDfotRg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1978071.ShBtZ0rfsK@coil>
From: Gorka Guardiola <paurea@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <1978071.ShBtZ0rfsK@coil>
Message-Id: <2087087D-B83B-43EE-8CA9-D3B578C91938@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:26:21 +0100
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [9fans] mk and transitive dependencies (was: gcc not an option
	for Plan9)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3438ec7a-ead8-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


> anybody care to explain what is the limitation of mk here? can't wrap my h=
ead=20
> around it...

It only knows about the rules you give it. It does not understand the real d=
ependencies in your software.
Also, because of this you tend to give it general rules which are not always=
 right.
There are more, but these are the ones Rob was referring to, I think.

(Just in case, I am not making a point for or against mk, just trying to ans=
wer his question)

G.