> The example in his question makes very clear what he wants: he wants a
> pattern-specific variable assignment.
Most likely yes. If you look at the subject of this thread it says
"Target-specific variable in subdirectory problem" so he probably only
wants the variable to be set when the target ma
No. You're mistake is to assume to know what he wants from looking at
his Makefile when you also know it's not working for him. You cannot
know what it is he wants when he apparently fails to express it in a
Makefile. So you're still only assuming. You base your assumption on the
fact that he p
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 21:16 +0100, Sven C. Dack wrote:
> I suggest you turn your attention towards him and ask him what he
> wants.
The example in his question makes very clear what he wants: he wants a
pattern-specific variable assignment.
The solution you provided was not a pattern-specific var
Paul's interpretation appears to be the same as mine, and seems like
the only straightforward interpretation of the OP's message. If that's
the case (and Benjamin can tell us if it is not), I believe his
message from 3:16 ET entirely explains the difference in behavior
between test-% used in patter
I suggest you turn your attention towards him and ask him what he wants.
My example does exactly what I say it does. It's just not your place to
tell me I'm wrong when you don't know what he wants his makefile to do
and so far haven't responded to him and only to me.
Or am I missing something
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 20:40 +0100, Sven C. Dack wrote:
> It's my understanding that we don't actually know what Benjamin wants to
> do, because nobody has asked. So I don't see how this would make me wrong.
>
> From his mail am I assuming he wants his Makefile to print "BAR" for a
> target "tes
It's my understanding that we don't actually know what Benjamin wants to
do, because nobody has asked. So I don't see how this would make me wrong.
From his mail am I assuming he wants his Makefile to print "BAR" for a
target "test-stem" as well as "subdir/test-stem", which is what he will
get
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 20:03 +0100, Sven C. Dack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> try it with the following rules:
>
> test-%: $(eval FOO = BAR)
> test-%:
> echo $(FOO)
No, this doesn't do what the OP wants. The eval in the prerequisites
of the pattern is expanded immediately so this is identical to wri
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Sven C. Dack wrote:
> Hello,
>
> try it with the following rules:
>
> test-%: $(eval FOO = BAR)
> test-%:
> echo $(FOO)
FOO is a global variable in this case. Not sure what you're trying to
demonstrate here.
Kyle
__
Hello,
try it with the following rules:
test-%: $(eval FOO = BAR)
test-%:
echo $(FOO)
$ make test-stem
echo BAR
BAR
$ make subdir/test-stem
echo BAR
BAR
I cannot tell you why it fails in your example. My guess is that it's
just not good practise to use a plain assignment for a prerequisit
Benjamin Cama (2 August 2017 12:19)
> I may be doing something wrong, but the following Makefile gives me
> strange results: the target-specific variable does not apply when used
> for a target in a subdirectory.
>
>test-%: FOO = BAR
>test-%:
>echo $(FOO)
>
> E.g.:
>
Hi,
I may be doing something wrong, but the following Makefile gives me
strange results: the target-specific variable does not apply when used
for a target in a subdirectory.
test-%: FOO = BAR
test-%:
echo $(FOO)
E.g.:
$ make test-stem
ech
12 matches
Mail list logo
