On Tue, 2013-09-24 at 21:25 +0400, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Ok, i will try to check it out. > Actually i'm also not familiar with such deep internals. I have just > reused an existing code, i did not actually change anything. > Additionally > this error simply wasn't the case in earlier make versions. > Ok, i agree, it's time to go deeper...
This problem has been fixed, although the fix is not committed yet. Please see Denis's patch posted recently. > Is it appropriate time to do this ? Actually a bit earlier would have been better :-). I want to make the final release this weekend unless something bad happens. So, ASAP is best. > I am passively following the list and at least notice what happens. I > remember about this decision and i wanted to roll it out when things > go more stable. But, okay. I think i can deliver it within this week. > What should i use as base ? Alpha RC ? svn (or git, what do you use) > HEAD? We use Git, from Savannah. See: https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/make/ (the CVS archive is outdated, don't use it). Based on git HEAD is best, but if not then the latest 3.99.92 release is OK (it's only a few days old). One question, though, that has to be addressed, is the legal question: if the code change is large enough to require copyright assignment then we'll need to handle that. If that happens it's unlikely this change will be ready for the next stable release: I don't want to hold it for that. _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
