On Wed, 2022-01-12 at 14:22 -0900, Britton Kerin wrote:
> > You can see that this example mimics your .silent example.
> > Your makefile provided a prerequisite to .SILENT. Make then knows
> > that .SILENT has a prerequisite.
>
> I agree that it's consistent syntax, but semantically it's bad. Th
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 6:17 AM Dmitry Goncharov
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 3:50 PM Britton Kerin wrote:
> > It looks like the .SILENT: with a recipe clobbers the .SILENT:
> > without
>
> Consider the following
>
> hello.tsk:
> hello.tsk: hello.h
> hello.tsk: hello.o; $(CC) -o $@ $<
>
>
>
On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 3:50 PM Britton Kerin wrote:
> It looks like the .SILENT: with a recipe clobbers the .SILENT:
> without
Consider the following
hello.tsk:
hello.tsk: hello.h
hello.tsk: hello.o; $(CC) -o $@ $<
Here, hello.tsk is the default goal and it depends on hello.o and hello.h.
Mul
.SILENT: (without prerequisites) doesn't work as expected when
.SILENT: some_target (with prerequisites) is present:
$ cat Makefile
.SILENT:
.SILENT: target_a
target_a:
echo target_a_recipe
target_b:
echo target_b_recipe
$ make target_b
