Re: make: slightly better diagnostic

2023-05-28 Thread Omar Polo
On 2023/05/28 18:09:00 +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > Here's a slightly more specific diff avoiding useless stat(2) looks fine to me, and in ports it produces a nice error message: % chmod 600 Makefile % make [...] make: don't know how to make do-extract Stop

Re: make: slightly better diagnostic

2023-05-28 Thread Marc Espie
Here's a slightly more specific diff avoiding useless stat(2) Index: engine.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/usr.bin/make/engine.c,v retrieving revision 1.70 diff -u -p -r1.70 engine.c --- engine.c25 Oct 2021 19:54:29 - 1.70 +++

Re: make: slightly better diagnostic

2023-05-28 Thread Marc Espie
On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 04:44:37PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote: > On 2023/05/28 13:16:34 +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > > Turns out that, due to the search rules we use, make > > is mostly silent in case it couldn't read a Makefile > > > > The following patch lets it track the makefilenames that > > do

Re: make: slightly better diagnostic

2023-05-28 Thread Omar Polo
On 2023/05/28 13:16:34 +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > Turns out that, due to the search rules we use, make > is mostly silent in case it couldn't read a Makefile > > The following patch lets it track the makefilenames that > do exist, but that it wasn't able to open, so that > a post-mortem can

make: slightly better diagnostic

2023-05-28 Thread Marc Espie
Turns out that, due to the search rules we use, make is mostly silent in case it couldn't read a Makefile The following patch lets it track the makefilenames that do exist, but that it wasn't able to open, so that a post-mortem can include these. Not sure if other use-cases could also use the