[bug #65438] Sort print-targets output.

[Dmitry Goncharov]

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #65438 (group make):


> I doubt most users will be able to map the output they see onto the input
make reads except in simple situations.  When you start having lots of include
files etc. it becomes hard to follow.

i was looking for some useful simple deterministic sorting criteria. This
order was the simplest and possibly useful.
i also considered printing all targets from a makefile before printing targets
from another makefile. However, this requires that make remembers
makefile:lineno of the rules without recipes. This additional requirement
caused me to reject the idea.


> Question: why not just _actually_ sort the output so the results are ordered
by pathname of the target instead of by order discovered?
I also considered sorting by pathname and could not see user benefits to
justify the extra code.
Would be good if those gentlemen who wanted the feature gave their input.

Another option is to abandon the patch and choose names in the test such that
the targets are hashed in the same order on both little and big endian.
Do you know why the current impl has to hash differently on little and big
endian?


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

[bug #54854] multi-target rules invoked too often with -j2

[Paul D. Smith]

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #54854 (group make):

If by "a warning (or a note)" you mean something printed by GNU Make, instead
of content in the documentation (this is already described there) then no, we
can't do that, because this behavior has many uses, and is used in many
situations and in many thousands of makefiles.  Generating messages would not
be appropriate.


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Re: TESTs fail features/output-sync and features/parallelism on Linux 4.4.194 armv7l

[Paul Smith]

On Tue, 2024-02-27 at 03:22 -0500, Dennis Clarke via Bug reports and
discussion for GNU make wrote:
> *** Testing FAILED!  Details: 
> makeerror-4.4.1-armv7l-unknown-linux-gnueabihf-izkr.tar.gz
> *** Please report to 

Apologies for the delay in replying.

When filing a bug report for failed regression tests please also attach
the tarball generated (see note above).

If you prefer you can send it directly to me rather than to the mailing
list.

Thanks!

-- 
Paul D. Smith Find some GNU Make tips at:
https://www.gnu.org   http://make.mad-scientist.net
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad
Scientist

[bug #65383] copy command does not work on Windows

[Paul D. Smith]

Update of bug #65383 (group make):

  Status:None => Not A Bug  
 Open/Closed:Open => Closed 

___

Follow-up Comment #2:

I'm not sure what is being requested and no followup.  If a followup is
provided this can be reopened.


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

[bug #65438] Sort print-targets output.

[Paul D. Smith]

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #65438 (group make):

I think the term "sort" isn't really correct here: from the user's point of
view they simply see the output in a different, and deterministic, but still
more or less random, order than they did before.  I doubt most users will be
able to map the output they see onto the input make reads except in simple
situations.  When you start having lots of include files etc. it becomes hard
to follow.

Question: why not just _actually_ sort the output so the results are ordered
by pathname of the target instead of by order discovered?


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

[bug #65273] Potential bug in the info function?

[Paul D. Smith]

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #65273 (group make):

Note that the trick in John's book no longer works without warnings in the
current Git-based code:


$ ./make
Makefile:3: warning: invalid variable name ' '
Makefile:4: warning: invalid variable reference ' '
Makefile:4: [ ]
make: *** No targets.  Stop.




___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

[bug #65510] INSTALL file not present

[Paul D. Smith]

Update of bug #65510 (group make):

  Status:None => Works for me   
 Open/Closed:Open => Closed 

___

Follow-up Comment #1:

The INSTALL file is not checked into the Git repository.  It's added as part
of the build process and appears in the downloadable source tarballs.

I've checked both the version you specified (4.4) and the latest (4.4.1) and
both have INSTALL files.

https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/make/make-4.4.tar.gz
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/make/make-4.4.1.tar.gz


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/