Re: make-4.2.93 patch port to c90

On Fri, 2020-01-03 at 22:21 -0500, Dmitry Goncharov via Bug reports and discussion for GNU make wrote: > This patch replaced a c99 piece of code with c90 code. > This c99 piece of code does not compile with the default ./configure && > make. > Also, -std=c99 removes __attribute__. I already made s

Re: patch, new test features/exec.

On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 12:10 PM Paul Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 22:21 -0400, Dmitry Goncharov via Bug reports and > discussion for GNU make wrote: > > This patch adds a new test features/exec. > > I added this test with a few adjustments. Thank you. i am glad to report that 4.2.93 passe

make-4.2.93 patch port to c90

Good morning. This patch replaced a c99 piece of code with c90 code. This c99 piece of code does not compile with the default ./configure && make. Also, -std=c99 removes __attribute__. regards, Dmitry diff --git a/src/file.c b/src/file.c index 2f1425e..acc8c0c 100644 --- a/src/file.c +++ b/src/

make-4.2.93 patch enhance error reporting from the test suite

Good morning. This patch enhances error reporting from the test suite. E.g. Clearing work... cannot unlink work/features/.nfs00c262d501ec: Device or resource busy cannot unlink work/features: Is a directory ./run_make_tests.pl: 697: Couldn't wipe out work: Is a directory regards, Dmi

make-4.2.93 patch fix compilation in -ansi/-std=c99 mode

Good morning. job.c fails to compile on glibc when -ansi or -std=c99 is specified. ../src/job.c: In function 'reap_children': ../src/job.c:753: error: incompatible type for argument 1 of 'wait' /usr/include/sys/wait.h:116: note: expected '__WAIT_STATUS' but argument is of type 'int *' This happen

Re: ENOEXEC from exec*() functions...?

On Fri, 2020-01-03 at 22:51 +, Martin Dorey wrote: > thanks to some new for loop initial declarations in file.c and rule.c, > which weren't legal in -std=gnu90, the compiler's default dialect. Hrm. I had thought that was legal in C90 but I guess I was wrong :(.

Re: ENOEXEC from exec*() functions...?

> please try make 4.2.93 and see if you get the right behavior. Works for me. Off topic for this thread and I don't want to stand in the way of progress towards pervasive use of a better C, but it was another notch more difficult to build, back in the Debian Jessie / gcc-4.9 era, thanks to some

Re: Feature request / patch: dependency-only prerequisites

On Fri, 2020-01-03 at 20:42 +0100, Christof Warlich wrote: > By the way, I stumbled into a minor issue entirely unrelated to the > feature above that you may want to fix: The gnulib git repository > referenced in bootstrap seems to have changed its location, so you may > want it to change it accord

[bug #42125] Explicit rules do not support multiple targets

Update of bug #42125 (project make): Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => psmith Open/Closed:Open => Closed Fixed Release:

Re: Feature request / patch: dependency-only prerequisites

Hi Paul, Am 03.01.20 um 18:24 schrieb Paul Smith: Hi Christof; .EXTRA_PREREQS is provided in 4.2.93 please test in your environment. Note that I did rework some things to allow it to work with implicit rules (previously it only worked for explicit rules) although it still can't be used as a pat

Re: Feature request / patch: dependency-only prerequisites

On Fri, 2019-08-09 at 17:52 +0200, Christof Warlich wrote: > attached is the comprehensive (and significantly reworked) patch that > implements the feature of a new internal variable Hi Christof; .EXTRA_PREREQS is provided in 4.2.93 please test in your environment. Note that I did rework some thi

Re: ENOEXEC from exec*() functions...?

On Tue, 2019-10-08 at 19:00 +, Martin Dorey wrote: > Sorry to reanimate this but I think I've run into a regression in 4.2.92 > over 4.2.1 that's probably related to this old email thread. Bug or > email, bug or email... email: > > martind@swiftboat:~/playpen/make-2019-10-08$ cat > Makefile >

Re: No rule to make ?

On Wed, 2019-10-09 at 06:00 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > make: *** No rule to make target 'libcrypto.a', needed by > 'test2.exe'. Stop. > > I have a simple makefile: > > $ cat Makefile > all: test.exe test2.exe > > LIBCRYPTO = -l:libcrypto.a > > test.exe: > $(CXX) $(CXXFLAGS) -g2 -O0

Re: patch, new test features/exec.

On Mon, 2019-10-14 at 22:21 -0400, Dmitry Goncharov via Bug reports and discussion for GNU make wrote: > This patch adds a new test features/exec. I added this test with a few adjustments.

Re: Word repeated

On Fri, 2020-01-03 at 18:41 +0530, nilsocket wrote: > In last bullet point, word `that` is repeated twice. Thanks!

Word repeated

https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html#Rule-Example In last bullet point, word `that` is repeated twice. -- Thank you