Re: Dependency on lisp.h

[Dave Love]

>>>>> "EZ" == Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

 EZ> It's possible that the whole issue is moot, since with today's
 EZ> machines recompiling Emacs is not such a big deal (I don't even
 EZ> have time for a coffee ;-).

For values of coffee == tea, that would only be true for me on our
high-end Alphas, iff NFS access to the source is up to speed.  Even
so, I think we should generate dependencies automatically and include
lisp.h in them.  It causes too much wasted effort when we miss
dependencies.

I didn't understand exactly what Richard was proposing for a split of
lisp.h when this came up before and I forgot to revisit it, but I'm
sure we should eventually.  IIRC, there are Make options that allow
you to override the modification time of specific files if extra
recompilation is a problem.