>>> "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 28.12.05 04:16 >>> %% "Jan Beulich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > jb> In a makefile like presented in the first response to this issue, > jb> it is claimed that it is appropriate for $? to be empty. However, > jb> I would assume that if $? is empty and if the target exists, then > jb> there is no need to remake the target. Or, to say it the other way > jb> around, if an existing target is remade it should be safe to > jb> assume $? is non-empty. > > jb> Further, the documentation says in 'Rules without Commands or > jb> Prerequisites': 'If a rule has no prerequisites or commands, and > jb> the target of the rule is a nonexistent file, then make imagines > jb> this target to have been updated whenever its rule is run. This > jb> implies that all targets depending on this one will always have > jb> their commands run.' This, to me, also implies that dependencies > jb> like the commonly used FORCE target should be visible in $?. > >Sorry, Jan, but I don't understand your comments here and how they >relate to either bug #8154 (other than that they are both about $?) or >the FORCE stuff you mention. That bug talks about updating archives >where there is no command to update them; you appear to be talking about >something completely different here. > >Most of the time an example is worth a few hundred words, at least: can >you please provide a simple couple of lines of makefile to reproduce the >situation you are seeing, show the output make gives, and explain >exactly why you feel this is incorrect? We can move on from there.
That's why I referred to the first response to bug #8154, which doesn't have to do with building archives. >Just to be clear, I tried this makefile: > > $ cat Makefile > foo: FORCE ; @echo '$$? = $?' > FORCE: > > $ make > $? = FORCE > >every time, so I don't understand your comment that FORCE should be >visible in $?, as if it weren't visible there... it IS visible there? The difference to the mentioned example is the missing 'touch foo' prior to running make. Depending on whether foo exists, $? will or will not be empty; its commands, however, will always be run (as expected). My point is that if a target's commands get run, should it be obvious that then $? cannot be empty? Thanks again, Jan _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
