I'm sorry, but I don't see this is a problem that needs solving. It's a topological sort, you see the target "foobar" on the output, big deal...
Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Lipofsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 4:14 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: antcall, depends, or something better > > > I have targets that do nothing but call other targets. > At first I tried to do this using dependencies, like this: > > <target name="foobar" depends="a,b" /> > <target name="a"> blah blah blah </target> > <target name="b"> blah blah blah </target> > > This works, but the output is confusing. It looks like > > a: > blah blah blah > > b: > blah blah blah > > foobar: > > someOtherTarget: > blah blah blah > > thus making it look like someOtherTarget is part of foobar. > It would be nice if I could make it clear that a and b > are part of foobar. I tried using > > <target name="foobar"> > <antcall target="a"> > <antcall target="b"> > </target> > > That doesn't work because dependencies get executed multiple times. > > Is there a good way to do this? Simply supressing the printing > of the foobar target in the first case would be good enough for me. > Or something like antcall which inherited the dependency record > would be better. It seems like it would be good to be able to > distingush between a dependency and a subtarget. > > Thanks, > Dan > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
