Follow-up Comment #4, bug #33138 (project make):
This is the original author. I've become very busy at my day job in the last
year or two so I've lost track of this. Thanks for picking it up and improving
it. I haven't had time to look at your new patch yet, and not sure when I
will, but here are
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #33138 (project make):
David Boyce wrote:
This is the original author. I've become very busy at my day job in the
last
year or two so I've lost track of this. Thanks for picking it up and
improving
it. I haven't had time to look at your new patch yet, and not sure
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #33138 (project make):
PS: Ignore the ugly line breaks in the mail. I posted the comment via Savannah
(where the lines appear correctly). Apparently it messed them up when
forwarding it via email. :-(
___
Reply to
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #33138 (project make):
I agree this seems useful. However, since it would involve changes
to existing code which are not strictly needed...
Not functional changes, just a little refactoring, and adding a new reliance
on tmpfile() may cause more stress to ports than
