Follow-up Comment #4, bug #47399 (project make):

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree over who implemented it
"incompatibly".  I've seen no evidence that any other implementation of make
provided this feature before GNU make (Roland added it in September 1988).

Also it's not clear what you mean when you say "make"; the original make
implemented by Feldman didn't have this feature, of course.  And the POSIX
definition of "make" doesn't mention it either (until recently POSIX didn't
require "include").  When I say "make" I clearly mean "GNU make".  I don't
know what variation of make you are referring to when you say "make".

I admire your attempt to create a single set of makefiles for a complex
project which could work across such disparate implementations of make; they
have barely more than the basic makefile structure in common.  It's an
impressive feat, but it must be a huge amount of frustrating effort.  Wouldn't
it be significantly less work to use a single implementation of make which is
portable across systems; it's much simpler to build a portable make one time
than to maintain makefiles that squeak through all the portability cracks in
different versions of make.  Or use a "meta language", which is what cmake and
automake do.

> Anyway, I look forward to seeing the enhancement. Thanks.

Honestly this is not high on my personal TODO list.  The current makefile
update behavior has been present for 27+ years and it's worked fine.  However
maybe someone will find it an interesting project.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

Bug-make mailing list

Reply via email to