> > On Thu, 2010-01-21 at 18:56 +0100, gabriele balducci wrote: > > If I can take advantage of your patience: so, `make -n install' is not > > 100% safe? Well, actually, this is the first time I incurred in this > > problem in many years; yet... > > Whether it is safe or not depends on the whether that particular > makefile is written properly (with respect to this feature of GNU make).
This is clear to me, now. > > Normally, when people create install rules they don't put references to > $(MAKE) in the same command line that also does other, side-effect > things like copy files around. Instead they make sure that the $(MAKE) > reference is on its own line (as you see in your t3 example, make does > not run any line that doesn't contain $(MAKE)). > > Regardless of whether the rule is "install", "clean", or anything else, > make always operates the same way (there's nothing special to make about > a target named "install"; that's just a convention that makefile writers > use). > > > Basically what I'm saying is this is a problem in the implementation of > the "install" rule(s) in the openssl makefile(s) and should be reported > to them. I think I will do this Again: thanks a lot for your work and patience ciao gabriele _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
