Hello, Christopher. Friday, August 16, 2013, 19:19:58 you wrote:
> Also, when I'm making changes to the exec() code I don't spend a lot of > time worrying about spawn() so it is possible that it will be broken > from time to time and, in fact, I think you actually noticed some > breakage in the cygwin list. Which one ? Since i wrote my first version i remember only two topics about spawn(): 1. Failure to compile Cygwin library - appeared to be PATH issue, i have fixed this. 2. gcc error: "spawn: no such file or directory" - it was installation problem, not a bug. By the way, breaking spawn() would break very important things like gcc and perl, because they use it to run subprocesses. > make already has a mechanism for passing command line switches down. I > think you'd have to work to defeat it. So, for correctness, I would > also would rather have an option which requires the user to specify this > on the command line. Heh... Okay, two against one plus one neutral, i have to retreat. Okay, i'll redo this using environment variable, this is IMHO still more reliable (some makefiles can be badly written, some build systems employ shell scripts which run "make" with hardcoded options, etc). I still think that compile-time option would be better. If something breaks, you at least can quickly disable it. But... -- С уважением, Pavel mailto:pavel_fe...@mail.ru _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
