On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 07:28 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> I noticed that when submitting bugs to bug-*@gnu.org, unlike other bug
> submission by mail systems, e.g., Deb bugs of Debian, the user receives
> no cheery auto reply acknowledging the bug was ever even received and
> didn't go into a
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 11:01 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:46 PM, David Boyce wrote:
> > So I've made a proof-of-concept patch
> > against 3.82.90 which seems to work without that overhead and my
> > question is, would this be of interest towards 3.83?
>
> Ping?
>
> The or
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 20:48 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Paul Smith
> > Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:29:09 -0400
> >
> > On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 11:01 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 1:46 PM, David Boyce
> > > wrote:
>
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 14:08 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
> > One example: I think saving stdout and stderr to different files and
> > then printing them separately is problematic; consider if your recipe
> > prints lots of in
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 20:59 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote:
> To prevent any kind of deadlock you sort of want to empty everything
> the stderr and stdout pipe buffers may contain.
>
> It is conceivable that the stdout pipe might contain two lines of text
> and stderr pipe might contain 1 by the time you
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 12:24 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
> > However, you could do both with some heuristics. Hm. Maybe not. I was
> > going to say you could merge them if stdout and stderr were going to the
> > same tty or file, but I don't think there's any good way in UNIX to know
> > whether two
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 07:18 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote:
> Right, of course :-) That is the obvious reason for using files,
> thanks! I was biased against writing things to disc which is probably
> silly, because it's probably not slow when compared to the size of the
> job that's running.
I think y
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 18:09 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > But yes, any feature
> > which consumes additional resources increases the risk of running out
> > of that resource. I don't know that recursion comes into it though,
>
> Each sub-Make inherits all the file descriptors of all its parents,
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 19:54 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> What about the other issue: with the fact that output from a recipe is
> only shown when the entire recipe is done. I think this is a serious
> drawback, at least in some use cases. Can anything be done about
> that?
I don't see how. The
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> I don't quite know the history of make on these commands and for what
> reason these command are defined as they are right now. But I'm feel
> that probably it is better to change the definition of these commands
> so that they are consistent with
On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 13:58 -0300, Federico Sanchez Pinzon wrote:
> from GNU Make manual: 3.6 (Overriding Part of Another Makefile):
> <<
> However, it is illegal for two makefiles to give different recipes for
> the same target.
> >>
Thanks.
--
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 12:35 +0100, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Anyhow - one problem we are seeing is that as we load and parse the
> ~50Mb of dependencies that we need (for part of writer) we are statting
> the same files involved in dependencies sometimes a thousand times or
> so. We do around 700k sta
On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 13:31 +0100, Jon Grant wrote:
> I noticed that the "all:" target must be at the top of a makefile,
> unless explicitly built by "make all". Is this expected? It seems
> quite limiting..
There is nothing special about the "all" target. That's just a
convention that many, but
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 09:17 +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Using the attached Makefile (I spent quite a while to strip it down from an
> Automake generated file), Make 3.81 reports:
>
> $ make
> echo accel.dat >accel.dat
> echo "{accel.dat}"
> {accel.dat}
> test -n "accel.dat"
> echo accel.pdf >ac
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 16:57 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:43:53 +0100
> > From: Tim Murphy
> >
> > I think it's an inevitable consequence that if you have a long-running
> > task then the output from it won't appear until it has completely
> > finished and you won't be
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 09:48 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > The other thing I was thinking is that this feature might want to be
> > enabled via a command-line argument. All the complex makefiles
> > generated by automake, etc. for example cannot take advantage of this
> > if you have to modif
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 17:39 +0200, Akim Demaille wrote:
> Le 2 mai 2011 à 16:07, Paul Smith a écrit :
>
> Hi Paul!
>
> > So, the circular dependency issue is because of this:
> >
> >> %.eps: %.pdf
> >>
> >> %.eps %.pdf: %.dat
> >
> &
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 15:03 +0200, Edward Welbourne wrote:
> > It all depends on the order in which make searches the rules, which is
> > why changing things in the makefile matters. If make finds the second
> > rule first then it sees it can build foo.eps and foo.pdf from foo.dat
> > and it's all
On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 13:00 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> > The other thing I was thinking is that this feature might want to be
> > enabled via a command-line argument. All the complex makefiles
> > generated by automake, etc. for example cannot take advantage of this if
> > you have to modify ever
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 17:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> This change seems to be breaking how $(wildcard) works for patterns
> without glob characters.
Ouch, you're right. Something missed in the regression test suite!
I'll fix it.
--
On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 10:15 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-05-07 at 17:06 +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > This change seems to be breaking how $(wildcard) works for patterns
> > without glob characters.
>
> Ouch, you're right. Something missed in the regres
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 10:10 +0200, Julien Palard wrote:
> I have hard time to understand a part of the make manual, the problem
> can be a typo of a subject not clearly expressed, here is the point :
>
> In the page about multiline variables :
> http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/make/Multi_002dLin
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 14:20 +0200, Julien Palard wrote:
> 2011/5/12 Paul Smith
> That's because the online manual describes the latest released version
> of GNU make (3.82) but your system is using an older version where
> this
> feature is not suppor
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 09:23 +0200, Folkert van Heusden wrote:
> When there's something going wrong in the makefile causing a "make
> multiple target patterns", make doesn't tell you what these multiple
> targets are.
> That is inconvenient when working with e.g. scriptfiles that select targets.
> A
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 15:02 +0200, Mario Schwalbe wrote:
> $ LC_ALL=C make -f Makefile.private-bug
> prereq:
> make: *** No rule to make target `private', needed by `target'. Stop.
>
> $ LC_ALL=C make -v
> GNU Make 3.81
The "private" feature was added in GNU make 3.82. It's not available in
GNU
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 14:13 +0100, Duncan Moore wrote:
> Using this makefile:
> .PHONY: all
> all: lib.a( a.o)
> (%.o): %.o
> @echo $@ $<
>
> make 3.81 gives what I would expect:
> lib.a a.o
>
> make 3.82, with the corrections for bug #30612, gives:
> make: *** No rule to make target `lib.a(
On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 16:35 -0400, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> This is with GNU Make 3.81. I originally posted this as a question on
> Stack Overflow, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6233574/
>
> According to the docs (10.5.1), % in a pattern rule matches "any
> nonempty substring". But it se
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 22:01 -0500, Perry Smith wrote:
> I opened a bug report with PostgreSQL but I believe it is a problem with
> make.
> The bug report there is 6059:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2011-06/msg00109.php
>
> You can also read a post here:
>
> https://groups.go
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 15:22 +0530, Rahul wrote:
> I am using make (version 3.81) for compilation.
> However the automatic variable $< doesnt increment as expected and uses
> the 1st source file itself for compiling all the objects.
There's not much help we can give based on this description. Plea
There is no standard definition of "lexical order" that I'm aware of
that means only, and exactly, sorted according to the current locale
collation definition. The free dictionary defines it as:
the arrangement of a set of items in accordance with a recursive
algorithm, such as th
Please don't reply only to me: discussions belong on the mailing lists.
On Tue, 2011-07-19 at 15:32 -0400, Rob Holbert wrote:
> The key in that definition is "depends on their first letter", not
> "the capitalization of their first letter". But in any event, if you
> don't have a clear definition
On Mon, 2011-08-29 at 17:02 -0300, Marcos Hocpfner wrote:
> hello, I need know, whit that version the GCC compiler the same, I am
> intall on a Solaris 10 sparc
This list is for people who need help using the GNU make program. You
need to ask your question on a list dedicated to either the GCC
co
On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 01:58 +, Michael Witten wrote:
> Hello?
I do prefer bugs files in Savannah to things sent on the mailing list,
just because they're easier to keep track of.
I applied this patch.
--
---
Paul D
On Tue, 2011-09-06 at 16:31 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> all::
>
> SHELL_PATH = /bin/sh
>
> SHELL = $(SHELL_PATH)
>
> some_file: shell_compatibility_test FORCE
> @echo making some_file
> @$(SHELL) true
Are you sure you don't mean "$(SHELL) -c true" here? The above will
never succ
On Thu, 2011-09-08 at 15:54 -0500, Dennis Sonifer wrote:
> I have an HPUX 11.23 PA-RISC machine. Downloaded the make file from
> your site, make-3.82.tar.gz. I am hoping there is just a setting or
> two away from perfection but I am generally unfamiliar with installing
> packages.
Looks like the
On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 21:06 +, Troy Runkel wrote:
> During our investigation we found that make 3.82 performs more stat()
> calls than 3.81.
Hi Troy. I've verified that this issue exists in 3.82 but it's already
been fixed in CVS and the fix will be available in the next release of
GNU make.
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 19:18 +, Troy Runkel wrote:
> FYI,
>
> I believe I've located the fix in the GNU make CVS repository that
> resolves the excessive stat() call problem. I've back-ported the fix
> into 3.82 and it appears to be working in our build system. The patch
> for 'read.c' is att
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 11:48 -0300, Carolina Carneiro wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to use make to compile the drivers of a program I have to
> use, called MOCASSIN.
> But when I type make mocassin, this error menssage appears:
>
> root@carol-HP-Pavilion-dv5-Notebook-PC:/home/carol/mocassin/mocassin
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 16:07 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote:
> Your makefile is trying to execure a directory rather than a program.
Hah! I didn't even notice it was a directory. Good catch.
I'm having a really bad week.
___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@g
On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 17:34 +0200, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently the online manual section on eval
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html#Eval-Function
>
> contains an example with folowing line:
>
> define PROGRAM_template =
>
> In comparison to that my local info p
On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 18:04 +0200, Georg Sauthoff wrote:
> > It's not the manual that's outdated, it's your version of GNU make.
>
> oh, you are right.
>
> Somehow did not expect such a change in syntax at this age of GNU make or
> between minor version numbers.
There is always new syntax in eve
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 23:59 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 10/03/2011 06:22 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > To re-summarize:
> >
> > - make does not color its output itself as of now
> >
> > - colorized output would help distincing output by make
> >from output by programs involked b
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 00:05 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:11:23 +0200
> > From: Sebastian Pipping
> >
> > > * The implementation is clean and portable and doesn't add lots of
> > > complexity to the code. Does everything support the color codes
> > >
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 11:03 -0700, Lawrence Ibarria wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: bug-make-bounces+libarria=nvidia@gnu.org [mailto:bug-make-
> > bounces+libarria=nvidia@gnu.org] On Behalf Of David Boyce
> > Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2011 2:17 PM
> > To: Tim Murphy
> > Cc
On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 12:58 +0200, Alexander Kriegisch wrote:
> I am using GNU make 3.81 on Ubuntu oneiric (11.10). I noticed that the
> German error message "Konnte nicht geöffnet werden." is sometimes listed
> in my output, even if I redirect stderr to /dev/null. So obviously it
> goes to stdo
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 09:05 +0200, Alexander Kriegisch wrote:
> Some more information: I found the relevant string in
>
> /usr/share/locale-langpack/de/LC_MESSAGES/make.mo
>
> which is part of Debian package language-pack-de-base, currently
> installed on my Ubuntu Oneiric in version 1:11.10+2011
On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 05:56 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 10/11/2011 10:11 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > Alright. Please initiate the copyright assignment process.
>
> Any news on this? So there are no preperations to do?
The paperwork generally requires you to list the files that you
On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 19:21 +0200, earlgrey wrote:
> __modules := $(sort $(shell grep -h '\.ko' /dev/null $(wildcard
> $(MODVERDIR)/*.mod)))
>
> with MODVERDIR=fglrx-11.06[Driver 8.861]
There's no problem with underscores.
The problem with [] is that these are special to the shell's globbing
cap
On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 10:36 -0500, tz wrote:
> Unfortunately, in the embedded world, not everything is updated
> constantly. Even the desktop is not updated weekly. ARM is still at
> Fedora 12, though 16 was just released. I don't and won't have an
> updated kernel tree that works unless I find
On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 14:51 -0500, tz wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2011 2:32 PM, "Paul Smith" wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 10:36 -0500, tz wrote:
> >
> > You don't need to cross-compile: you can compile natively. What you
> > can't do is rely on yo
On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 22:42 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> the copyright assignment form reached the FSF more than a week ago.
>
> Would be great to get some more review on my patch now.
> I don't mind if on-list, off-list, half-half...
Hi Sebastian. I got notified by the FSF that your discla
On Wed, 2011-10-12 at 19:32 +, Troy Runkel wrote:
> The GNU make configure script currently doesn’t enable high resolution
> file timestamp support for the Mac OSX platform. However, nanosecond
> file timestamps are available, they’re just stored in a different
> location in the ‘struct stat’
On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 13:34 -0700, Tim Newsome wrote:
> We do a lot of builds (as in double-digit servers building non-stop).
> Sometimes, when a part of the build fails, make -j8 would die with:
> make: INTERNAL: Exiting with 9 jobserver tokens available; should be
> 8
>
> With -j16 the error wo
On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 12:32 -0600, david.hag...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have a make file that includes a set of machine generated dependency
> files. Those files describe a set of shared libraries to be build, of the
> form:
>
> somedir/libfoo.so: somedir/libbar.so somedir/libbaz.so
>
> Note that "l
On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 15:40 -0600, david.hag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Try running the parallel version with -d (redirect the output because
> > it's voluminous) and see what make says about trying to build
> > somedir/libfoo.so: what does it say about the somedir/libbar.so
> > prerequisite?
> That i
On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 17:35 -0600, David Hagood wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 17:02 -0500, Paul Smith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 15:40 -0600, david.hag...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Try running the parallel version with -d (redirect the output because
> > > &
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 18:55 +0530, Sijith James Philip wrote:
> For project specific need i want to change makefile version 3.82 to 3.81.
> Is it possible to do that.
The source code for most previous versions of GNU make is available for
download:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/make/
Choose the one
On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 16:04 +0200, Atte Peltomäki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> here's a small fix for a corner case I happened to run into.
>
> Scenario:
>
> Run 'make -t' on an incomplete tree, where a dependency file and
> the subdirectory it should be in, are completely missing. Make fails
> and e
On Wed, 2011-12-07 at 11:53 -0800, Tim Newsome wrote:
> Does anybody know what the right solution to this problem is? I'm
> happy to implement/test either one, but I don't want to spend my time
> working on a solution that won't be accepted upstream.
I committed a fix for this.
--
--
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 12:41 +, Tim Murphy wrote:
> I looked at the implementation and it seems like a different name
> would suit this function - e.g. "writefile". It basically writes text
> from it's arguments out to a file.
Thanks all; I'll take a look.
--
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 01:31 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > I have to say that I feel that David's
> > point of 20 Oct is well-taken, that a more flexible command line
> > interface would be better.
>
> Alright. I propose to transform
>
> --output-format=(color|plain)
>
> into
>
> --fo
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 19:29 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > I confess I'm not an expert in i18n, so it's quite possible I'm making
> > something out of nothing very important here. But I think it's worth
> > investigating. It's possible, for example, that it's sufficient to
> > "translate" th
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 22:42 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 01/05/2012 09:46 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > The easiest way of abstracting this is to have a function that turns
> > on a given color, and another function that turns off a color and
> > returns to the default color. ("Color" can a
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 22:35 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Function vsnprintf could be used to fill variable "output".
> Quoting the local printf(3) man page:
Erhm. Forgot about that: neither vsprintf() nor vsnprintf() were
included in the C89 standard. They were added in the C99 standard.
A
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 15:39 +0100, Edward Welbourne wrote:
> The other reason to not hardcore ASCII colorizing is simply to leave
> the user at liberty to chose which colours to use for which semantic
> types.
If you check the patch you'll see that it does have the ability to
change the colors. H
On Fri, 2012-01-13 at 21:02 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> how do we proceed?
I wasn't sure if the latest patch (patch 5?) you posted incorporated all
the latest comments from myself and Eli. I'll take another look.
--
-
Hi all.
Going through the content of GNU make sources recently it occurs to me
we have a LOT of ways to build GNU make. Maybe at one time or another
all these different ways were necessary but I wonder if they still are.
Can't we reduce them somewhat?
For ways to build GNU make we have:
1.
On Thu, 2011-12-15 at 15:13 -0800, Lawrence Ibarria wrote:
> This is a rather simple path that implements a very simplified version
> of what Tim suggested in his message of Sept 25th
> (https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-make/2011-09/msg00044.html ).
>
> Paul, what do you think? I’d rather no
On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 13:26 +, Tim Murphy wrote:
> There might be some question about how the variable "$(FILE)" would
> look if you tried to iterate over its contents. e.g. would one see an
> iteration for each word and with "\n"s marking lines or is each line
> an "atom" for want of a better
On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 06:59 -0500, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Paul Smith
> > 1. Standard configure/Makefile.am
> > 2. build.sh
> > 3. Makefile.DOS
> > 4. NMakefile
> > 5. SMakefile
> > 6. build_w32.bat
> > 7.
On Mon, 2012-01-23 at 09:52 -0800, Lawrence Ibarria wrote:
> I do like this suggestion, feels quite clean!
I implemented the "write" side of this proposal and committed it to CVS,
along with regression tests and documentation.
The "read" side is slightly more work but I can do this one too if
peo
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 17:44 -0500, David Boyce wrote:
> Thanks, this will make a lot of people happy.
>
> One nit: as mentioned earlier I think it would be good to document the
> relationship of $(file ...) with timestamps. Assuming nothing special
> is done (I haven't looked at the code) then wri
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 21:33 -0500, David Boyce wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:19 PM, Paul Smith wrote:
> > Is there "something special" you would prefer beyond this?
>
> Well ... it's more of a thought than an actual request or preference,
> but I'm s
On Sun, 2012-02-12 at 19:34 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:11:49 +0100
> > From: Sebastian Pipping
> > CC: psm...@gnu.org, bug-make@gnu.org
> >
> > Since we would run into buffer overflows with sprintf/vsprintf, we
> > rely on snprintf/vsnprintf for that task. Quoting
On Sat, 2012-02-18 at 18:46 +, Tim Murphy wrote:
> The option you need is:
> -p, --print-data-base Print make's internal database.
This is the (only) place to start but just to warn you: the output of
this option was not designed to be used this way and we don't guarantee
that the format
On Thu, 2012-02-09 at 17:25 +, Tim Murphy wrote:
> I also think that it can be expensive to append things onto very long
> lists in make but that's just suspicion and I really need to take a
> proper look at it instead of making accusations.
Appending is not very expensive. Make doesn't know
On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 21:58 -0800, Howard Chu wrote:
> You've just described an O(n^2) behavior. This is definitely a drag;
> but it really depends on how heavily you make use of macros.
Well, in this case it depends on how heavily you make use of APPEND
operations on macros. Is it worth adding a
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 17:39 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> If been playing with gnulib integration by now:
Thanks Sebastian. I'll take a look at this but probably not until the
weekend. I was on vacation (scuba diving from a live-aboard off
Belize--and yes it was exactly as fantastic as it so
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 06:57 -0700, Eric Blake wrote:
> Make fails to restrict output to just directories when a wildcard
> contains both a trailing slash and internal slashes, even though it does
> the right thing with no internal slashes.
Hi Eric;
This is actually a bug in glibc's glob() functio
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 18:17 +0100, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> on page [1] it reads:
>
> "CFLAGS should be used in every invocation of the C compiler,
>both those which do compilation and those which do linking."
>
> It would be nice to have an explanation why CFLAGS whould be used with
> li
On Mon, 2012-04-02 at 23:13 -0400, Brown, Ruben wrote:
> Is this behavior by design or an unfortunately long lived bug? If it
> is by design, what purpose does maintaining this behavior serve?
>
> ***Makefile***
> .PHONY: all A B
> all: A
> VAR := 0
> A: B
> A: VAR:= 1
> B:
> @echo VAR=$(VAR
On Tue, 2012-04-03 at 16:20 -0600, Teng wrote:
> Excuse me. I have a question about Section 3.7 of the GNU Make Manual
> Version 3.81 whose title is "How Makefiles Are Remade". It said
> "After reading in all mkefiles, make will consider each as a goal target
> and attempt to update it." But accord
Hi Tim;
Before going too much further note that I've got a semi-implemented
"load" operator in my source already, which fulfills a similar function
except in a less sophisticated way: it just calls a function in the
loaded object after loading and that function can do whatever it wants.
I can sen
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 18:27 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> A few years ago I suggested a plugin architecture much like this (but
> I didn't supply a patch - crucial difference), to allow a plugin to
> make the "up-to-date" determination, replacing the hardwired timestamp
> system. [...] Any idea how h
On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 23:59 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote:
> I see the value in a plugin system as being that I don't have to
> recompile the plugins for every version of make. In a way it's tending
> towards "why bother" if you did have to do that.
Well, this kind of combines with my other issue regard
On Fri, 2012-04-06 at 22:35 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 13:30:31 -0400
> > From: David Boyce
> > Cc: tnmur...@gmail.com, bug-make@gnu.org
> >
> > Sorry, I've never used libltdl. Maybe it would have been better just
> > to say "libraries exist to paper over the difference
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 10:35 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> m;groups.html;w3m -cols=999 -dump $?
> g:g.xq; basex $?
Please remember to always include the version of GNU make you are using.
In the current release (GNU make 3.82), I get:
Makefile:1: *** missing separator. Stop.
--
-
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 00:19 +, Christophe Poncy wrote:
> I have a have a bug during the compile phase of my Funtoo GNU/Linux
> box. I was trying to emerge the 'boot-update' package, it seems there
> is a problem for compiling one of its dependency (lzo ).
[...]
> >>> Compiling source in
>
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 11:45 -0700, Nitin A Kamble wrote:
> The attached patch fixes build of make with automake.
Thanks for your interest in GNU make. Note that GNU make 3.81 was
released in 2006 and we are no longer creating patches for that release.
The AM_C_PROTOTYPE option was already remove
On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 00:04 +0530, Samkit Jain wrote:
> I have been breaking my head over a simple thing of measuring the
> progress of build
It's simple to say, but it's not simple to know. The structure of make
and how it performs builds means that it's not possible to know this.
make simply s
On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 19:42 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> BTW: to make it more easy to discover at make runtime whether the bug has
> been fixed in the make version in use, could a proper new entry be added
> to .FEATURES? Maybe 'can-have-lazy-variables'? (I know, I suck at choosing
> names).
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 00:14 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> >> LAZYVAR = $(override LAZYVAR := val)$(LAZY)
> >
> > I don't have any idea what this is supposed to do... it doesn't make any
> > sense as written.
> >
> In fact, it should have been s/$(LAZY)/$(LAZYVAR)/. Sorry for the confusio
On Mon, 2012-06-11 at 18:40 +0200, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> The GNU make 3.82 manual reads:
>
> Normally, this is exactly what you want: if a target's prerequisite
> is updated, then the target should also be updated.
>
> Occasionally, however, you have a situation where you want to
On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 10:52 +0400, Yakunin Vladimir wrote:
> Not shure that this is bug, but this behavior looks strange. Couldn`t
> find anything about it, so write here.
This isn't a bug; check out the section in the GNU make manual titled
"How Makefiles Are Remade". That will explain what's go
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 22:36 +0200, Reinier Post wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 03:19:11PM +, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I note that patch #5108 seems to create a single global mutex, whereas the
> > documentation for the SCO .MUTEX target suggests that each occurrence of
> > .MUTE
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 16:59 -0400, Paul Smith wrote:
> export _MASTERPID ?= $(shell echo $$PPID)
> MASTERPID := $(_MASTERPID)
> LOCKFILE := /tmp/linklock.$(MASTERPID)
Bleah, that won't work right.
It'll have to be something like:
ifeq ($(MASTERPID),)
On Sun, 2012-07-08 at 06:04 +0800, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
> Can you please add at least _one_ example to
> (info "(make) Prerequisite Types")
> also consider retitling it "Order-only Prerequisites" or adding a sub-section.
>
> Does it mean the only difference between
> A:B C;D
> A:|B C;D
> is
On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 13:32 -0400, David Boyce wrote:
> I think it would be a good thing
> if older manuals could be kept online, e.g. by adding a version level:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/3.81/make.html
> http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/3.82/make.html
>
> No, I'm not off
On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 11:59 -0700, icegood wrote:
> .PHONEY: all
> all:
> if [ \( "$$(ls *.lock 2>/dev/null)" == "" \) ]; then \
> touch $@.lock; \
> if [ \( ! -e $@ \) -o \( ../$(tag_fn) -nt $@ \) ]; then \
> echo $@ done; \
> else \
> touch $@; \
> fi; \
>
On Sun, 2012-10-14 at 15:08 +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 10/13/2012 05:09 PM, Eric Seerden wrote:
> > I'm trying to get in contact with Paul D. Smith who worked with rms on
> > the GNU make (gmake) utility & apparently he is now the maintainer of
> > the software..
>
> Since you have the a
201 - 300 of 1499 matches
Mail list logo
