Re: Installing GoogleEarth

You typed a space instead of a hyphen after "make". sudo make-googleearth-package --force sudo make googleearth-package --force Don't blush. If only all bug reports were so complete. From: bug-make-bounces+mdorey=bluearc@gnu.org To: bug-make@gnu.org Sent:

Installing GoogleEarth

Trying to install GE on a quadCore Intel machine running Lucid Lynx as per: http://www.techdrivein.com/2010/06/install-google-earth-in-ubuntu-1004.html I get an error which i was not expecting do I have the wrong hardware for the installation). Upon issuing the command: sudo make googleearth-packa

[bug #30370] add a shorthand syntax for foreach-eval-call

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #30370 (project make): The request at stackoverflow.com describes what I really want. I intentionally phrased the request in such a way that a particular implementation was suggested in order to avoid the criticism that the idea is "vague" or "infeasible". The syntax w

[bug #30381] Don't avoid implicit rule recursion quite so soon.

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #30381 (project make): But it isn't just a matter of infinite recursion; there's a very serious issue of performance as well, even without infinite recursion. Computing pattern rule matches can already take quite a while: if we add more ways in which patterns can recurs

[bug #30370] add a shorthand syntax for foreach-eval-call

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #30370 (project make): The major issue here, besides the effort involved of course, is finding a syntax or format that is backward compatible, at least enough to avoid breaking a lot of makefiles. I also have to say that the request at stackoverflow.com and the request

[bug #30370] add a shorthand syntax for foreach-eval-call

Update of bug #30370 (project make): Triage Status:None => Medium Effort ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

[bug #30370] add a shorthand syntax for foreach-eval-call

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #30370 (project make): An example is at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2880975/make-invoke-command-for-multiple-targets-of-multiple-files ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #30381] Don't avoid implicit rule recursion quite so soon.

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #30381 (project make): PS the second rule in the example should also have a > of course. ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

[bug #30381] Don't avoid implicit rule recursion quite so soon.

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #30381 (project make): Sorry to have been so cryptic, but I really wanted to express the need and various ideas for how to approach a solution, rather than present a detailed proposal - for that, I would need more input from other users and more knowledge about the detai

[bug #27809] several win64 fixes

, here are some small suggestions, see the attached new patch file w64-20100709.diff: * job.c (pid2str): Do not limit %Id to gcc >= 4 because gcc-3.4.5 from mingw.org understands %Id just fine, and the __GNUC__ > 3 condition also eliminates the possibility of MSVC compiler being in use. (exe

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 15:30:09 +0300 > From: Ozkan Sezer > Cc: psm...@gnu.org, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org > > In make.h, the w32_kill prototpe sitll needs updating, though, like: > > -int w32_kill (int pid, int sig); > +int w32_kill (pid_t pid, int sig); I'm holding off make.h modi

[bug #27809] several win64 fixes

Update of bug #27809 (project make): Status:None => Fixed ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

[bug #30312] $(abspath ...) fails with Windows UNC path (with fix)

Update of bug #30312 (project make): Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => eliz ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #27809] several win64 fixes

Update of bug #27809 (project make): Assigned to:None => eliz ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: [snip] >> > Thanks.  I used almost all of the patches in w64-all-20100705.diff. >> > >> >> Thanks for applying the patches. >> >> There are some issues, though: > > I forgot to send these upstream, now fixed. > Thanks. In make.h, the w32_kill

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 14:45:03 +0300 > From: Ozkan Sezer > Cc: psm...@gnu.org, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Ozkan Sezer > >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:58:04 + > >> > >> > >> Follow-up Comment #11, bug #27809 (pro

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:30 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:18:12 +0300 >> From: Ozkan Sezer >> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org, bo...@kolpackov.net >> >> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >>> Date: Mon, 05

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Ozkan Sezer >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:58:04 + >> >> >> Follow-up Comment #11, bug #27809 (project make): >> >> On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >> From: "Paul D. Smith" >> >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:32

[bug #27809] several win64 fixes

Update of bug #27809 (project make): Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

[bug #30312] $(abspath ...) fails with Windows UNC path (with fix)

Update of bug #30312 (project make): Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Messa

[bug #30312] $(abspath ...) fails with Windows UNC path (with fix)

Update of bug #30312 (project make): Fixed Release:None => CVS ___ Follow-up Comment #1: I committed a slightly different fix for this problem. Thanks.

[bug #27825] win64 fix for config.h.W32.template

Update of bug #27825 (project make): Fixed Release:None => CVS ___ Follow-up Comment #4: Fixed as part of bug #27809. ___ Reply

[bug #27809] several win64 fixes

Update of bug #27809 (project make): Fixed Release:None => CVS ___ Follow-up Comment #13: Fixed in CVS, usind mots of the last patch. ___

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

> From: Ozkan Sezer > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 19:58:04 + > > > Follow-up Comment #11, bug #27809 (project make): > > On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: "Paul D. Smith" > >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:32:15 + > >> > >> I've applied most of the second patch.

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote: > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:52 +0300 >>> From: Eli Zaretskii >>> Cc: seze...@gmail.com, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org >>> >>> > From: "Paul D. Smith" >>> > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 20

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:52 +0300 >> From: Eli Zaretskii >> Cc: seze...@gmail.com, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org >> >> > From: "Paul D. Smith" >> > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:32:15 + >> > >> > >> > Follow-up Comment #9, bug #

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:52 +0300 >> From: Eli Zaretskii >> Cc: seze...@gmail.com, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org >> >> > From: "Paul D. Smith" >> > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:32:15 + >> > >> > >> > Follow-up Comment #9, bug #

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 13:18:12 +0300 > From: Ozkan Sezer > Cc: bug-make@gnu.org, bo...@kolpackov.net > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >>> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:52 +0300 > >>> From: Eli Zaretskii > >>> Cc:

Re: Implicit Rule Search fails

I just realized for simplicity and better understanding what I am trying to achieve both makefiles could be merged into: --- dst ?= . $(dst)/target1.out: $(dst)/test/Test.cc.o @echo linking $(dst)/%.cc.d: ../../src/target1/%.cc @echo making dep $(dst)/%.cc.o: ../../src/target1/%.cc

Re: [bug #27809] several win64 fixes

> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 21:42:52 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: seze...@gmail.com, bo...@kolpackov.net, bug-make@gnu.org > > > From: "Paul D. Smith" > > Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:32:15 + > > > > > > Follow-up Comment #9, bug #27809 (project make): > > > > I've applied most of the seco

Implicit Rule Search fails

Hello, I have got two Makefiles: Makefile2: ./target1.out: ./test/Test.cc.o @echo linking ./%.cc.d: ../../src/target1/%.cc @echo making dep ./%.cc.o: ../../src/target1/%.cc @echo compiling -include ./test/Test.cc.d and Makefile2_working: ---

Re: GNU make 3.81.90 prerelease available

> From: Paul Smith > Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 01:55:49 -0400 > > The first prerelease of the next version of GNU make is available on the > alpha FTP site (or via HTTP): > > > 98fd14ffe8f3950fabdde0267adb7680 > ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/make/make-3.81.90.tar.gz > 2590d3cd304d32ba1df98ee1eea49e5f