On Tue, 13 Jun 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > I am testing the following pattern rules with the program “GNU Make 4.2.1-1.7” > on my openSUSE Tumbleweed system as I would like to adjust some areas > in affected make scripts for another evolving software tool. > > … > %.cmi: %.mli > $(OCAMLC_CMD) -c $< > > %.cmo: %.ml %.cmi > $(OCAMLC_CMD) -c $< > > %.cmx: %.ml %.cmi > $(OCAMLOPT_CMD) -c $< > … > > I have tried a specific command out. > > elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/20160205/commons> LANG=C make -d > common.cmo V=1 ... > This test showed the expected results.
Two questions: 1) What files were present in the directory before you ran that command? 2) What _was_ that expected result? (I would guess that most of the people on the bug-make mailing list have never worked with ocaml and therefore don't know what needs to be done to build it.) > I have tried another command variant out. > > elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/20160205/commons> LANG=C make -d > commands.cmo V=1 ... > Now I wonder why I do not get the desired software generation results for > this test case. Why is the source file “commands.ml” not compiled again > in the way as the other one? The snippet of Makefile you provided didn't include any rules for building "commands.ml", so I don't understand why you expect make to build it. Philip Guenther _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
