Hi John:
I saw the xargs solution in the cygwin news group. but does it work from
within the make utility?
e.g. for the following rule
dummyfile : *.java
echo $? > file
javac @file
touch dummyfile
When make launches a shell to execute the echo command. the $? expands to a
very large list and fails. so even if I have xargs in there, the $? is still
gonna expand and cause make or sh to crash.
is there a specific way that i can use a combination of $? and xargs ?
Thanks,
Mohan
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Alvord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mohan Krishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2000 2:14 PM
Subject: Re: Timestamp is not being checked on NT + other
> I have solved similar problems using xargs to break up the long list of
> names into manageable chunks. This is on a NT system. john
>
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, Mohan Krishnan wrote:
>
> > Hi Paul:
> > I am faced with another problem regarding the command line length. I
> > have a large dependency list which I am echoing to a file using
> >
> > echo $? > some_file
> >
> > And on NT sh.exe (from cygnus) keeps crashing saying either command like
too
> > long or STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION.
> >
> > Is there a cure for this?
> >
> > Really appreciate your time,
> > rgds
> > mohan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Mohan Krishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 6:59 AM
> > Subject: Re: Timestamp is not being checked on NT + other
> >
> >
> > > %% "Mohan Krishnan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > Hi; please don't send HTML to the list, thanks!
> > >
> > > mk> I hv make version 3.78.1 on NT.
> > >
> > > mk> 1) make reports "nothing to make" even though the target has
> > > mk> changed. Same test works fine on Solaris. I am attaching a
small
> > > mk> test Makefile with some test files. First time through make
will
> > > mk> create the .out files (by touch.exe). Now open up aaa.txt and
edit
> > > mk> and save it. then try make again. It would report nothing to
make.
> > >
> > > I can't reproduce this on UNIX and I don't have any Windows systems.
I
> > > don't really support the Windows port; you need to talk to the folks
> > > that do (see the AUTHORS file in the GNU make distribution).
> > >
> > > However, I do know that due to limitations in the Windows filesystem,
> > > GNU make is forced to treat all timestamps within 2 or 3 seconds of
each
> > > other as identical. So, if you update that file sufficiently quickly
> > > from the time the .out file was changed make might not notice there's
> > > been a change.
> > >
> > > Comments in the code say:
> > >
> > > #ifdef WINDOWS32
> > > /*
> > > * FAT filesystems round time to nearest even second(!).
Just
> > > * allow for any file (NTFS or FAT) to perhaps suffer from
this
> > > * braindamage.
> > > */
> > > if (mtime > now && (((mtime % 2) == 0) && ((mtime-1) >
now)))
> > > #else
> > > #ifdef __MSDOS__
> > > /* Scrupulous testing indicates that some Windows
> > > filesystems can set file times up to 3 sec into the
future!
> > */
> > > if (mtime > now + 3)
> > > #else
> > > if (mtime > now)
> > > #endif
> > > #endif
> > >
> > > Other than that, I'm afraid I don't have much to say. Try running
make
> > > with the -d option and see why it doesn't want to remake the file.
> > >
> > > mk> 2) This problem occurs both in NT and Solaris. If the target is
a
> > > mk> directory in your present working directory then make will
always
> > > mk> report "xyz is up to date"!
> > >
> > > This isn't a bug, this is expected behavior. Make doesn't
differentiate
> > > between directories and files: if the target exists, it exists.
> > >
> > > What if you _wanted_ to write a target that created a directory:
> > >
> > > $(OBJDIR): ; mkdir $(OBJDIR)
> > >
> > > ? This is actually not that uncommon (although not the best way to do
> > > it, IMO).
> > >
> > > Look up the .PHONY rule in the GNU make manual for how to make this
work
> > > as you want.
> > >
> > > --
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > > Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Network Management
> > Development
> > > "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad
> > Scientist
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > > These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for
> > them.
> > >
> >
>
