%% Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: hm> One possibility that didn't introduce any new syntax would be that if hm> for a rule
hm> target1 target2: prerequisites hm> command1 hm> command2 hm> the automatic variables $@ and $% are never unfolded during the hm> evaluation of the commands, make would assume that the commands hm> have made all the targets up-to-date. Oh gack!! :) I'm going to pretend you never wrote that, Henning. We'll chalk it up to Monday-morning-itis :). hm> Such a principle may be too arcane and adhockish to admit of hm> understandable documentation, however. At the least... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Find some GNU make tips at: http://www.gnu.org http://make.paulandlesley.org "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
