Hi, Paul and other developers,
2014-08-18 22:35 GMT+08:00 Paul Smith psm...@gnu.org:
On Mon, 2014-08-18 at 21:27 +0800, Macpaul Lin wrote:
Variables used in conditional lines usually has '$',
'(', and ')' prefix, and etc.
We can use vairable_name_extract() to extract pure variable
name
This sounds like an extremely useful debugging feature. I have often
had the problem of getting the wrong build parameters but not being
sure exactly why because of the great complexity of makefiles that are
trying to build many different sorts of object files all with slight
variations that are
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
Make folks:
You may want to check out http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=857 and
add comments and/or change GNU make behavior accordingly. There, the
argument is made that HP-UX make behavior is nicer than GNU's current
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Eric Blake ebl...@redhat.com wrote:
Make folks:
You may want to check out http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=857 and
add comments and/or change GNU make behavior accordingly.
Eric Blake wrote:
You may want to check out http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=857 and
add comments and/or change GNU make behavior accordingly.
Let's leave GNU 'make' alone. Its behavior is better for rules like this:
copy: original
cp -p original copy
I've added a comment to
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, Eric Blake wrote:
The POSIX recommendation was therefore that GNU should change its
behavior to act like HP-UX, and consider identical timestamps as
out-of-date, because the standard will be fixed to allow HP-UX behavior.
A change like this may result in some builds which
Ray Donnelly wrote:
There was a bug in libfaketime so that the nanosecond field wasn't
cleared
That sounds like it's a different issue. If a program botches the
nanosecond component of timestamps, it shouldn't matter whether 'make'
uses the traditional/GNU or the HP-UX approach; either way,
The obvious compromise would be to change the behavior only in the
presence of the .POSIX: special target.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Paul Eggert egg...@cs.ucla.edu wrote:
Eric Blake wrote:
You may want to check out http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=857 and
add comments and/or
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Ray Donnelly mingw.andr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:03 PM, David Boyce david.s.bo...@gmail.com wrote:
The obvious compromise would be to change the behavior only in the
presence of the .POSIX: special target.
Sounds pragmatic; the repeatable
David Boyce wrote:
The obvious compromise would be to change the behavior only in the
presence of the .POSIX: special target.
We should limit .POSIX to what POSIX requires. Even if the ruling
stands POSIX won't require the HP-UX behavior, so .POSIX should be
independent of this issue.
10 matches
Mail list logo
