Zack Weinberg (30 June 2025 19:23) wrote:
> It doesn't have to control what happens inside a shell command. All
> it has to do is split the recipe into individual commands *before*
> expanding anything -- this is perfectly possible, since \n and ;
> *don't* separate commands when they come from expansion -- and then,
> for each command string, perform expansion, execute the result, wait
> for execution to complete. It's *already* waiting for execution of
> each command in a recipe before going on to the next one.
Could that run into problems if someone's setting of SHELL was somewhat
unorthodox ? Remember that commands may be passed to an arbitrary
command interpreter, $SHELL, and make can't hope to know the parsing
rules for every command interpreter's language.
Eddy.
Confidential
