%% Noel Yap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
ny> I see. You wouldn't happen to have a patch that'll allow make to
ny> use the implicit rule for the former example, would you?
Don't know which example you're talking about when you refer to "the
former example", but this:
>>> %.mk: %.mk
>>> cp $(<) $(@)
Just doesn't make sense. It's like saying:
foo.o : foo.o
How can a target depend on itself as a prerequisite? That requirement
cannot be satisfied given our current understanding of the laws of
space/time :).
You _COULD_, however, do this:
aoeu/%.mk : %.mk
cp $< $@
and then all would be right with the world. Or at least make would be
happy.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://make.paulandlesley.org
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
_______________________________________________
Help-make mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
