On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, Peter A. Kerzum wrote: > Yeah, Fabio's way seem quite clean and pretty. I agree that eval should > support include. > > > Sure. You specify that the other prerequisites also depend on exe-deps: > > > > foo: exe-deps foo.o bar.o baz.o > > foo.o bar.o baz.o: exe-deps > > > > But as far as I understand make this will cause troubles if exe-deps > will include rule for any (all) of foo.o bar.o baz.o -- is it ?
Exactly. For the way make is conceived now, once it starts building a target it doesn't check for any other rule which have that save target. In other words, once make goes to build foo.o, and then it executes a rule which imports some other rules for foo.o, those rules are just ignored. This I think should change, so that my apporach would be seamlessy supported. > I dont like recursive makes too -- there's a long time I am looking for > a good solution to avoid it. May be you can point me to a some > discussion regarding complex GNU make-based build systems (I've read > paulandlesley =) or may be we should discuss this elsewhere ? My system is growing up quite nicely, if you're interested I can give you you some example code, and explain how does that work. Would be good if we could discuss this on an ML, so that other people who are interested may join the discussion. Fabio Alemagna PS: yes Paul, the exhaustive bug report is about to come, haven't had time to care about it lately :) _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
