Re: possible bug with order rules

2003-11-13 Thread Noel Yap
Great. Has this patch been submitted? Thanks, Noel Benoit Poulot-Cazajous wrote: > > Noel Yap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > $(install.DIR)/common/%/.: | $(install.DIR)/common/. > >@echo building $(@): $(^) > > order-only dependencies do not work very well in implicit rules. > This

Re: possible bug with order rules

2003-11-13 Thread Benoit Poulot-Cazajous
Noel Yap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > $(install.DIR)/common/%/.: | $(install.DIR)/common/. >@echo building $(@): $(^) order-only dependencies do not work very well in implicit rules. This quick&dirty patch may fix the problem : --- implicit.c.orig 2002-09-04 09:26:19.0 +0200

Re: possible bug with order rules

2003-11-09 Thread Noel Yap
After a little more digging, it looks like mf1 "works" because it's the first rule that gets triggered, not the second. Unfortunately, in my particular case, having the first rule triggered will cause the wrong action to take place. Here's what I see with "gmake -npqr": # Implicit Rules ../in

possible bug with order rules

2003-11-09 Thread Noel Yap
I'm getting the following output: $ ls -ld ../install/common/. drwxr-x---5 yapn morgan 96 Nov 9 16:52 ../install/common/./ $ ls -ld ../install/common/make/.: ls: ../install/common/make/.\:: No such file or directory $ cat mf2 install.DIR := ../install $(install.DIR)/common/%