Thank's Philip G. for replying, here my comments:
First, I added the $(eval $(warning ....)) stuf just to convince myseft
about how $$ is "evaluated", and for that mater, like you say, the
outer $(eval is just a "no-op", ( it's my way-of-doing to debug $(eval
stufffff). i.e check for correctness of first and second expansion rounds).
And you gave me the "correct hint" in order to understand the problem,
"the semicolon bug" in 3.80, I "solved" some years ago with
backslashing.
Your solution which is to put the complete "target: ; command" line into
a var works fine,
and I tested also the following one:
%sc := ;
$(eval target: $(%sc) command)
which is to just put the semicolon into a var (of course not necessairy
with 3.81).
Finally, I think I prefer your solution, since it allows to write the
complete rule in the "usual" way (multi-line with <TAB>command) by using
define.
But most important is: the "double expansion" is definitivelly the
"right way to reason" with $(eval ...)'s.
_______________________________________________
Help-make mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
