Re: Idea: Standard way to negate special targets

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 7:25 PM David A. Wheeler wrote: > > I would strongly prefer "!" just binding to the next target & documenting > that. > The first time someone sees they may wonder how far it binds, > but it's pretty obvious that there are multiple possibilities, > so they can look it up o

Re: Idea: Standard way to negate special targets

Or! How about a general syntax for canceling prerequisites (not just for special targets)? Say, "!:" (inspired by "&:")? Then you'd just say ".ONESHELL!: my-tricky-target". More verbose than "my-tricky-target: ! .ONESHELL" or whatever, but seems more robust to me (and more general, although I co

[bug #55316] Stack (or rather "scope"?) backtracing facility

Additional Item Attachment, bug #55316 (project make): File name: 0001-Print-backtrace-on-fatal-error.patch Size:13 KB ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[bug #55316] Stack (or rather "scope"?) backtracing facility

URL: Summary: Stack (or rather "scope"?) backtracing facility Project: make Submitted by: cmm2 Submitted on: Fri 28 Dec 2018 08:25:05 PM UTC Severity: 3 - Normal Item Gr