Includes [1] ntdll
Jon Griffiths
jon_p_griffiths at yahoo.com
Tue Dec 7 10:53:01 CST 2004
Hi,
--- Andreas Mohr <andi at rhlx01.fht-esslingen.de> wrote:
> Note that some removed include files might be needed for different
> systems,
> so some breakage might/may/will follow this patch.
I deliberately made my script remove only Wines own headers for this
reason. It will not remove system header files. I also manually
checked that nothing within an #ifdef block was deleted. So this
shouldn't cause any problems for other *nices.
If there is an issue it will be with mingw or VC++. But that would
point out an incompatability in our headers with theirs, and that
would be a good thing, IMHO.
> (Gerald Pfeifer will *love* your "nice" work, I'm sure ;-)
I'm happy if Gerald wants to try the patches for beakage before they
are committed...
> But I'd still vote strongly for including it, since it will remove
> lots of cruft.
Yes, its a little crufty as-is. My reasoning is that anything that
reduces my compile times after updates is good, and my laptop takes
quite a while to rebuild Wine, Minimising dependencies helps that.
On a related note, would anyone object to a patch that auto-split
config.h into multiple files during the build process, and changing
makedep to generate dependencies only on the generated config-value
file?
This would be a big win whenever config.h changes. Currently when
config.h changes, 980 files are rebuilt. Using a smarter method would
only rebuild the files that depend on the HAVE_ option that was
changed (which is bound to be a significantly smaller number).
The Linux kernel process does this already, check out
/usr/src/linux/Documentation/smart-config.txt for details.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Jon
=====
"Don't wait for the seas to part, or messiahs to come;
Don't you sit around and waste this chance..." - Live
jon_p_griffiths at yahoo.com
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list