Re: [PATCH 0/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites

On Wed, 01 Apr 2020 21:00:15 -0400 Paul Smith wrote: > > > > > But % pattern rules are GNU make specific syntax, since this syntax > > is not specified by POSIX [1]. I fear that I'll have to use a more > > complicated fix... > > Correct, you cannot use pattern rules in portable makefiles. Wel

[PATCH 1/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites

See: https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Suffix-Rules.html#Suffix-Rules Suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites of their own. If they have any, they are treated as normal files with funny names, not as suffix rules. Thus, the rule: ... --- build-aux/po/Makefile.in.in

[PATCH 0/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites

BTW, looks, that "%ts: %ds" notaion is preferable for BSD make too: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=SunOS+5.9&format=html (Implicit Rules section). Petr Ovtchenkov (1): old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisit

[PATCH 0/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites

BTW, looks, that "%ts: %ds" notaion is preferable for BSD make too: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=SunOS+5.9&format=html (Implicit Rules section). Petr Ovtchenkov (1): old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisit

[PATCH 1/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites

See: https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Suffix-Rules.html#Suffix-Rules Suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites of their own. If they have any, they are treated as normal files with funny names, not as suffix rules. Thus, the rule: ... --- build-aux/po/Makefile.in.in