%% Henning Makholm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
hm> Scripsit "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
jk> I don't believe any of these messages were acknowledged:
>> OK, I do have these two items in my "enhancements" folder, to be looked
>> at.
hm> I can see I shouldn't be too worried that
Scripsit "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> jk> I don't believe any of these messages were acknowledged:
> OK, I do have these two items in my "enhancements" folder, to be looked
> at.
I can see I shouldn't be too worried that my bug report and patch
from last Friday wasn't acknowledged ei
%% Jonathan Kamens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 10:24:10 -0500
>> From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> This has been fixed in CVS for a while; the fix will be in the next
>> release of GNU make. If you like I can send you a patch.
jk> Has the bug
> Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 10:24:10 -0500
> From: "Paul D. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> This has been fixed in CVS for a while; the fix will be in the next
> release of GNU make. If you like I can send you a patch.
Has the bug with multiple pattern-specific assignments for a single
target b
%% Jonathan Kamens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jk> Alas, we've found another problem with pattern-specific variable
jk> assignments in 3.79.1 that is independent of my fix and that I don't
jk> have time to debug right now. If you put this into a Makefile:
jk> a.b:
jk> echo $(RUL
A while back, I sent you a patch to make multiple pattern-specific
variable assignments for a target work in Make 3.79.1.
Alas, we've found another problem with pattern-specific variable
assignments in 3.79.1 that is independent of my fix and that I don't
have time to debug right now. If you put
