Hello Paul and GNU make developers,
The Austin Group (the people in charge of the POSIX specification)
recently discussed this bug, and desire feedback from the GNU make
community:
https://www.austingroupbugs.net/bug_view_page.php?bug_id=1890
With GNU make 4.4.1 (and no makefile):
$ touch foo.c
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 14:08 -0500, Paul Smith wrote:
> Technically, make's built-in recipe for .c.o is:
Of course here I mean GNU Make, not POSIX make :-/.
On Thu, 2024-12-19 at 12:17 -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> Currently GNU make does not conform to the required .c.o inference
> rule because it adds a -o option.
Technically, make's built-in recipe for .c.o is:
$(COMPILE.c) $(OUTPUT_OPTION) $<
where OUTPUT_OPTION is set to "-o $@" if GNU Make's co
On Sun, 2024-04-07 at 09:30 -0400, Dmitry Goncharov wrote:
> Good morning, Paul.
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 8:08 AM Paul Smith wrote:
> > In short, if you create a new file and assign it to the FSF then
> > you can still do whatever you want with that file, includ
On 4/7/24 15:30, Dmitry Goncharov wrote:
Good morning, Paul.
Thanks for the explanation.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 8:08 AM Paul Smith wrote:
In short, if you create a new file and assign it to the FSF then you
can still do whatever you want with that file, including even use a
completely propr
Good morning, Paul.
Thanks for the explanation.
On Sun, Apr 7, 2024 at 8:08 AM Paul Smith wrote:
> In short, if you create a new file and assign it to the FSF then you
> can still do whatever you want with that file, including even use a
> completely proprietary license for it.
i am intending t
On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 09:33 -0400, Dmitry Goncharov wrote:
> Paul, i'd like to contribute another bugfix which involves a brand
> new source code file. i will assign the ownership to fsf, if needed.
> However, i'd like to be able to use that source file in my other
> projects, which are not gpl. i
Good morning.
Paul, i'd like to contribute another bugfix which involves a brand new
source code file. i will assign the ownership to fsf, if needed.
However, i'd like to be able to use that source file in my other
projects, which are not gpl. i have seen other gnu projects including
public domain
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 7:25 PM Dmitry Goncharov
wrote:
> Thank you for a quick response, Greg.
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 4:56 PM Greg McGary wrote:
> > The code makes no effort to be endian-independent because it is written
> > for in-memory hashing on a uniprocessor or homogeneous multiproce
> It should be easy to fix: swap the bytes in sum_get_unaligned_32.
Thanks for the pointer, Andreas.
Will try it out.
regards, Dmitry
Thank you for a quick response, Greg.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 4:56 PM Greg McGary wrote:
> The code makes no effort to be endian-independent because it is written
> for in-memory hashing on a uniprocessor or homogeneous multiprocessor.
Do you know of a specific difficulty of making that hashing
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 6:17 PM Dmitry Goncharov
wrote:
> Good morning.
>
> The hash table from id utils from imported to gnu make.
> This hash table hashes the same string to different brackets on little
> and big endian.
> Can you please shed some light why there needs to be this difference
> i
On Mär 25 2024, Dmitry Goncharov wrote:
> The hash table from id utils from imported to gnu make.
> This hash table hashes the same string to different brackets on little
> and big endian.
> Can you please shed some light why there needs to be this difference
> in hashing on little and big endian?
Good morning.
The hash table from id utils from imported to gnu make.
This hash table hashes the same string to different brackets on little
and big endian.
Can you please shed some light why there needs to be this difference
in hashing on little and big endian?
regards, Dmitry
On Fri, 2023-02-24 at 17:40 +0100, Gisle Vanem wrote:
> Paul Smith wrote:
> > If you use "-d" you'll get the info you want:
> >
> > No implicit rule found for 'default'.
> > Considering target file 'lib'.
> > Finished prerequisites of target file 'lib'.
> > No need to remake ta
Paul Smith wrote:
If you use "-d" you'll get the info you want:
No implicit rule found for 'default'.
Considering target file 'lib'.
Finished prerequisites of target file 'lib'.
No need to remake target 'lib'; using VPATH name 'apps/lib'.
Finished prerequisites of target file
On Fri, 2023-02-24 at 08:44 +0100, Gisle Vanem wrote:
> So I want to create a './lib' directory in
> 'Current Directory', but gnumake won't do it
> since there is a 'lib' under 'apps'. Output:
> gnumake: Nothing to be done for 'default'.
>
> Why doesn't it understand the meaning of '.'?
It doe
Hello list.
I sometimes have issues when a 'VPATH' doesn't
do what I'd like. E.g. in this 'vpath-test.mak'
file:
#
# there is a 'apps/lib' directory here:
#
VPATH = apps
GEN_DIRS = ./lib
default all: $(GEN_DIRS)
$(GEN_DIRS):
mkdir --verbose $@
---
So I want to cr
On Fri, 2022-10-28 at 13:10 +, Durig, Burak W wrote:
> I have an A 12 based emulator I want to run, I’m following a guide
> and I’m stuck at creating the below:
> $ x86_64_ranchu_defconfig
> The error I keep seeing is that the default configuration can’t be
> found. I can type x86_64_defcibfu
Hello,
I have an A 12 based emulator I want to run, I'm following a guide and I'm
stuck at creating the below:
$ x86_64_ranchu_defconfig
The error I keep seeing is that the default configuration can't be found. I can
type x86_64_defcibfug though...?
I'm using android-goldfish-4.4-dev from th
rerequisites
and recipe.
If a pattern rule has multiple targets, make knows that the rule’s
recipe is responsible
for making all of the targets. The recipe is executed only once to
make all the targets.
When searching for a pattern rule to match a target, the target
patterns of a rule other
than the o
On Tuesday, February 19, 2019 10:51:42 AM EST Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>
> (Makefile begin)-
> .PHONY: all
> all: foo.x foo.z
>
> %.x %.z:
> touch $@
> -(Makefile end)--
>
> $ rm foo*
> $ make
> touch foo.x
> $ make
> touch foo.z
> $ make
> make: Not
Hi.
I have a question about the following behavior.
(Makefile begin)-
.PHONY: all
all: foo.x foo.z
%.x %.z:
touch $@
-(Makefile end)--
$ rm foo*
$ make
touch foo.x
$ make
touch foo.z
$ make
make: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
Whe
Minimal example:
$ cat makefile
$(shell rm -rf /tmp/blah)
$(shell mkdir -p /tmp/blah)
ASDF = $(info $1 $(wildcard /tmp/blah/*)
$(if ${BLAH},$(info before $(wildcard /tmp/blah/*)))
$(shell touch /tmp/blah/{a,b,c}.txt)
$(info after $(wildcard /tmp/blah/*.txt))
$ make --version
GNU Make 4.1
...snip.
Hello,
I tried to use `wildcard` in place of doing `ls` and found some
limitation I did not know about.
I faced the issue that, even with deferred variables, the value of
`wildcard` was cached to the value it has on first evaluation and does
not reflect the last state of the filesystem.
W
On Jan 16 2018, Paul Smith wrote:
> The automake generated makefiles know how to rebuild Makefile.in,
> Makefile, configure, etc. based on the out-of-date-ness of the base
> files such as configure.ac and Makefile.am. So if those files are
> updated, then the makefile will attempt to re-run thos
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
> I think if you really wanted to pursue this, it might be worthwhile
> creating a little script that updated the timestamps on all files to
> still have their relative timestamp relationship, but just newer. For
> example you could sort all th
On Tue, 2018-01-16 at 09:13 -0800, David Boyce wrote:
> It looks like the touching not only destroys incremental build
> capability (expected and not an issue) but toggles the makefile into
> "developer mode".
>
> I'm not looking for any changes here, just wondering whether anyone
> knows which fi
This isn't a bug in GNU make at all, just a question about how it interacts
with its own use of automake which is something I have little experience
of. First, a little background. I'm working in a corporate Linux
environment in which there are a few tasks that don't work well in NF
Excuse-mois, je ne parle pas le Francais bien mais si je vous comprend bien
vous avez utilisait l'option avec make mais ca c'est un option de f77.
Peut etre vous pouvez taper:
make FFLAGS="--N ftrap=common"
Bonne chance,
Tim
2016-12-28 9:44 GMT+00:00 rania rais :
> Bonjour,
>
>
> j'aimerais
Bonjour,
j'aimerais compiler un code contenant des fichiers en fortran 77 et 90 en
utilisant l'option -ftrap=common.
Mon code contient un makefile en f77.
J'ai essayé avec make "--N ftrap=common" ça compile mais ça me donne toujours
un message
" The following floating-point exceptions are si
> From: Gisle Vanem
> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 20:41:33 +0100
>
> It's a PITA to capture stderr on cmd.
Not for some years. Just use 2>, like you'd do with a Unixy shell.
(But as you say, this is unrelated to the issue at hand.)
___
Bug-make mailing lis
> Second, I suspect the macro is a red herring and thus this is not
> really a “Macro question”. The macro should just expand to the same
> text you’d get by typing it out. What happens when the macro is
> replaced by the equivalent 3-line recipe?
The same result. I tried changing the comm
> From: Gisle Vanem
> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 18:20:47 +0100
>
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > The Windows shell understands || and && between 2 commands. I think
> > you already know that, so I'm quite sure I'm missing something here,
> > because that's the first thing I'd try.
>
> There is no Win
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> The Windows shell understands || and && between 2 commands. I think
> you already know that, so I'm quite sure I'm missing something here,
> because that's the first thing I'd try.
There is no Windows shell (cmd nor 4nt) involved here. I don't
have any 'SHELL' in the Makef
> From: Gisle Vanem
> Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 16:19:39 +0100
>
> I have a question regarding a GNU-make macro like this
> (which I use to link a MSVC .dll):
>
> define do_link_DLL
> link $(LDFLAGS) -dll -out:$(1) -implib:$(2) \
> -pdb:$(1:.dll=.p
First, I think there’s some missing context as you seem to have an
unusual environment. You’re mixing Unix (cat, rm) and Windows (link)
invocations; is it Cygwin, GNUWin32, MKS, ???
Second, I suspect the macro is a red herring and thus this is not
really a “Macro question”. The macro should just
I have a question regarding a GNU-make macro like this
(which I use to link a MSVC .dll):
define do_link_DLL
link $(LDFLAGS) -dll -out:$(1) -implib:$(2) \
-pdb:$(1:.dll=.pdb) -map:$(1:.dll=.map) $(3) > link.tmp
cat link.tmp >> $(1:.dll=.map)
rm -f $(2:.lib=.exp)
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Tom Varga wrote:
> b.zoo1 really only depends on b.bar1
> b.zoo2 really only depends on b.bar2
>
> However, only one rule (and tool) is used to build both b.bar1 and b.bar2
>
> I really don't want force b.zoo1 to artificially depend on b.bar2 as it's
> not a real
riate forum for asking gnumake questions,
> > please let me know. However, I'm hoping that this is a short enough
> > question, that you might be able to quickly answer it for me.
>
> It's best to use either bug-make@gnu.org or help-m...@gnu.org rather
> than email me di
b.zoo1 really only depends on b.bar1
b.zoo2 really only depends on b.bar2
However, only one rule (and tool) is used to build both b.bar1 and b.bar2
I really don't want force b.zoo1 to artificially depend on b.bar2 as it's
not a real dependency.
I was really just hoping to be able to convince gnu
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Tom Varga wrote:
>
> On page 120 of the gnumake manual, it mentions support for pattern
> rules with multiple targets.
>
> This pattern rule has two targets:
> %.tab.c %.tab.h: %.y
> bison -d $<
>
> So, if I have a simple rule that looks like:
>
> %.bar1 %.bar2 :
On page 120 of the gnumake manual, it mentions support for pattern
rules with multiple targets.
This pattern rule has two targets:
%.tab.c %.tab.h: %.y
bison -d $<
So, if I have a simple rule that looks like:
%.bar1 %.bar2 : %.foo
touch $(*F).bar1
touch $(*F).bar2
and then do:
> touch a.foo
> From: Oleksandr Gavenko
> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:17:17 +0200
> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org, help-m...@gnu.org
>
> On 2013-01-12, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:57:28 -0800
> >> From: David Boyce
> >> Cc: help-make , bug-make
> >>
> >> % make -j2
> >> sleep 3
> >> while ec
On 2013-01-10, jungsoo.son wrote:
> I always run 'make' with -j8. In this case, when there are a fail it is too
> hard to check the fail.
>
> I want to kill the all sub-make process immediately when the error occurred.
>
> How can i stop build immediately in build fail?
>
I make such example:
.P
On 2013-01-12, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:57:28 -0800
>> From: David Boyce
>> Cc: help-make , bug-make
>>
>> % make -j2
>> sleep 3
>> while echo ok; do sleep 1; done
>> ok
>> ok
>> ok
>> ok
>> exit 1
>> stopping make!
>> make: *** [job2] Terminated
>> make: *** [job1] Ter
On 2013-01-10, jungsoo.son wrote:
How can i stop build immediately in build fail?
There is a patch already for this:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2009-01/msg00035.html
And an example of how it works:
http://ninjaverification.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/continous-integration-system-u
> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 17:57:28 -0800
> From: David Boyce
> Cc: help-make , bug-make
>
> % make -j2
> sleep 3
> while echo ok; do sleep 1; done
> ok
> ok
> ok
> ok
> exit 1
> stopping make!
> make: *** [job2] Terminated
> make: *** [job1] Terminated
> Terminated
Which is dangerous, since when
It may be a reasonable feature request but it also may not be that
hard to implement with existing functionality. Here's one approach:
% cat makefile
SHELL := $(abspath shx)
.PHONY: job
job: job1 job2
.PHONY: job1
job1:
sleep 3
exit 1
.PHONY: job2
job2:
while echo ok; do
Hello,
I always run 'make' with -j8. In this case, when there are a fail it is too
hard to check the fail.
I want to kill the all sub-make process immediately when the error occurred.
How can i stop build immediately in build fail?
Best regards
Jungsoo Son
Update of bug #32202 (project make):
Status:None => Not A Bug
Open/Closed:Open => Closed
Triage Status:None => Need Info
_
URL:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?32202>
Summary: Infinite loop when trying to question dialog
project Makefile
Project: make
Submitted by: None
Submitted on: ven 21 jan 2011 09:01:09 UTC
Severity: 3 -
> This change is going to be a nightmare for us users.
Some of us noticed that the documentation made no promise, so always
coded to not assume sorting ...
> Things that have worked "forever" now break.
True. Then again, I'm looking forward to this as an opportunity to
catch bugs in our make fi
On Thu, 2010-11-11 at 12:46 -0800, Warren Dodge wrote:
> * WARNING: Future backward-incompatibility!
> Wildcards are not documented as returning sorted values, but up to and
> including this release the results have been sorted and some makefiles are
> apparently depending on that. In the ne
In the NEWS file for make-3.82 is this info about the wildcard function
* WARNING: Future backward-incompatibility!
Wildcards are not documented as returning sorted values, but up to and
including this release the results have been sorted and some makefiles are
apparently depending on that
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 14:03 +0800, suyi wrote:
> After I uncompress make.3.81.tar on IBM AIX 5.3 ,I run make then
> get the error
>
> exec(): 0509-036 Cannot load program ./make because of the following errors:
> 0509-150 Dependent module /usr/local/lib/libintl.a(libintl.so.3)
> coul
After I uncompress make.3.81.tar on IBM AIX 5.3 ,I run make then get the
error
exec(): 0509-036 Cannot load program ./make because of the following errors:
0509-150 Dependent module /usr/local/lib/libintl.a(libintl.so.3)
could not be loaded.
0509-152 Member libintl.so.3 is
%% Kamini Prajapati <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
kp> I am working on TinyOS project.
kp> Recently I upgraded my system with the following Patches.
kp> Previously when I compile any Application, it used to show me the
kp> RAM and ROM information. But after the upgrade, it doesn't show
k
Hi,
I am working on TinyOS project.
Recently I upgraded my system with the following Patches.
nesc-1.1.2b-1.cygwin.i386.rpmtinyos-1.1.14Jul2005cvs-1.cygwin.noarch.rpm
Previously when I compile any Application, it used to show me the RAM and ROM information.
But after the upgrade, it doesn't sho
Dear Sir:
I want to install crossGCC in the SCO UNIX. How
can I inhibit the UNIXMAKE, and when I make, it is
calling the GNUMAKE not the UNIXMAKE.
Thanks a lot!
_
Do You Yahoo!?
美女明星应有尽有，"一搜"搜遍美图、艳图和酷图
http://image.yisou.com
100兆邮箱够
Dear Sir:
I want to install a crossGCC compiler in my SCO
unix3.2v5.0.6 system:
../binutils2.13.1/configure --target=$target
--prefix=$prefix -v
make all install
The error information is:
line 1192: syntax error.
Can you help me?
Thanks a lot!
%% "Steve Thomson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
st> sde-gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
This error is being generated from GCC (the compiler) and as such has
nothing to do with GNU make--and so this is the wrong mailing list to
ask questions about it.
Good luck!
Dear Sirs;
I sent the following message to
'[EMAIL PROTECTED]' but don't know if
it is better directed your way???
I have recently loaded the FGT
suite of tools (from MIPS) onto a Win98 PC. The installation of both
cygwin and FGT appeared to go without error. However, when I a
%% "Kowalski, Dennis M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
kdm> I am using GNU make 3.79.1 on a Sun Solaris box.
I think there is some confusion here.
kdm> I have a dot h file that has includes in it.
kdm> i.e.
kdm> a.h
kdm>#include b.h
kdm> I have a new b.h in the NODE1 include di
Hi
I am using GNU make 3.79.1 on a Sun Solaris box.
I have encountered the following situation.
I have a dot h file that has includes in it.
i.e.
a.h
#include b.h
I have a new b.h in the NODE1 include directory
The a.h and older b.h are in the NODE2 include directory
NODE1/include
b.
%% "Wagner, Phillip W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
wpw> 1. While using the -win32 shell how does one correctly expand an
wpw>environment variable for usage on the command line. The
wpw>%DOS_VARIABLE% doesn't always expand when executing a command.
wpw>It appears to still be
Hi,
I am new to make and was wondering about a couple things about the behavior
of the gnu make tool. Who would be the best person to ask these questions?
I will need to ask via email as I am isolated from the web (for a number of
activities) via our firewall...
1. While using the -win32 shell
%% Kovalevich Victor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
kv>
Please try to send plain text to the mailing list rather than HTML.
Thanks.
kv> I have a question: can I use automatic variables $@ or $@F in the
kv> dependency of a rule ?
No.
kv> When these variables are defi
Hi.
I have a question: can I use automatic variables $@ or $@F in the dependency
of a rule ? When these variables are defined exactly: after then all the
dependencies of a rule are resolved or when the processing of a rule is started
?
Is the rule below correct?
CCC=gcc
CPPFLAGS=-DLINUX
%% Helmut Dipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
hd> What can I do to avoid those warnings?
You need to synchronize your clocks better.
hd> The clocks of both machines are synchronized daily with a
hd> difference lower than one minute.
One minute is a _huge_ amount of time, to make. You ne
Hello,
I only have a question to warnings from make:
There is a file-tree on machine "phosphat" (platform SunOS)
and a make, after a "all-clean", running on machine "pollux"
(platform Linux) to make "all" for this file-tree.
During the make I got a numbe
%% Kovalevich Victor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
kv>
kv>
kv>
kv>
Please don't send HTML to the mailing lists; plain text is just fine.
Thanks!
kv> Hi!
kv> I have one question: can I use 'include' instruction in a make file that
kv> i
I am sorry I forgot to denote I have being using make 3.79
--
Best regards, Kovalevich Victor
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Bug-make mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Hi!
I have one question: can I use 'include' instruction in a make file that
is included by this instruction in an other make file. For example:
~/dir1/Makefile.inc:
#
# ~/dir1/Makefile.inc file body
ROOT=${HOME}
~/dir1/dir2/Makefile.inc:
#
# ~/dir1/dir2/Makefile.inc file bo
To whom it may concern,
Somehow, the "gnu.ps" postscript file does not have page numbered
when printed. This makes future reference to a certain page
number extremely difficult after consulting the "Index of Concepts"
index.
Is there anything that I can do
i discovered a small problem compiling "make-3.79.1" on a cray.
it doesn't consider the prototype and the inline function
compatible. is this line really necessary for anyone?
i deleted it and it seemed fine on a linux machine.
$ diff -u gettext.c.orig gettext.c
--- gettext.c.orig Wed Feb
%% Regarding RE: Make 3.79.1 bug/question; you wrote:
>> It's already fixed in the source code in CVS. There has been
>> no release
zg> Does it mean that next version of make will has the fix?
Yes, it will.
>> What I'm guessing you want is this:
&g
Title: RE: Make 3.79.1 bug/question
Thanks again for the response!
Just two questions to clarify...
> It's already fixed in the source code in CVS. There has been
> no release
Does it mean that next version of make will has the fix?
> Your makefile is wrong anyway,
Title: RE: Make 3.79.1 bug/question
THANK YOU VERY MUCH for the fast response!
Grigory.
-Original Message-
From: Paul D. Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 5:58 PM
To: Zagorodnev, Grigory
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Re: Make 3.79.1 bu
%% "Zagorodnev, Grigory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
zg> export A:= commom
zg> target: A+= specific
zg> target:
zg> @echo $(A)
zg> ...I got following error:
zg> make: expand.c:489: allocated_variable_append: Assertion
zg> `current_variable_set_list->next != 0' failed.
zg> Abo
Title: Make 3.79.1 bug/question
Hi!
I'm using GNU Make version 3.79.1 (i386-redhat-linux) and with a simple Makefile...
export A:= commom
target: A+= specific
target:
@echo $(A)
...I got following error:
make: expand.
%% "Margalit, Sivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ms> I have a problem to define variable assignment per target.
With any question, request for help, or bug report, please always
include the version of GNU make you're using and the operating system
(and version) y
Hello
I have a problem to define variable assignment per target.
Requirements:
all_targets = target1 target2
for target1 set variable a = val1
for target2 set variable a = val2
all_target:
call $@ a .
In make manual chapter "Target-specifi
%% "John Jamulla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jj> I can't seem to find a newsgroup or forum somewhere to ask a
jj> complex gmake question.
jj> Can you give me an idea where I could ask some questions?
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
news:gnu.utils
Hello,
I can't seem to find a newsgroup or forum somewhere to ask a
complex gmake question.
Can you give me an idea where I could ask some questions?
Thanks,
John Jamulla
___
Bug-make mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gn
%% Duane Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
de> [~> make -v
de> GNU Make version 3.77, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath.
de> Under SunOS 4 make, we can do this:
de> foo.lst + foo.o: foo.s
de> my_assembler -l foo.lst -o foo.o foo.s
de> Key point is: "target *PLUS* target" Thi
This is not a bug, but a question about a feature.
I don't know where else to post this.
[~> make -v
GNU Make version 3.77, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath.
Under SunOS 4 make, we can do this:
foo.lst + foo.o: foo.s
my_assembler -l foo.lst -o foo.o foo.s
Key point is:
%% "Smith, Jack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
sj> I was hoping that you could help me with a little issue I am
sj> working on. I am trying to write a utility that will analyse a
sj> makefile, and create a target 'tree' from it.
I think your best bet is to hack GNU make itself; after it fin
I was hoping that you could help me with a little issue I am working on.
I am trying to write a utility that will analyse a makefile, and create a
target 'tree' from it.
In preparation for this, I thought I would write out the Backus-Nour Fom of
the various elements of a makefile, so that I coul
89 matches
Mail list logo
