Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 01:38 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: >> What I meant is checking the existence of a rule for a target not a >> real file built for a target. > > But how do you check for a "rule for a target"? > > What if the pattern rule is "%e" not "%.exe"? That will

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 01:38 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: > What I meant is checking the existence of a rule for a target not a > real file built for a target. But how do you check for a "rule for a target"? What if the pattern rule is "%e" not "%.exe"? That will still match of course. Or "%xe"

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Paul Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2023-01-16 at 22:14 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: >>> But this does not seem like an easy thing to accomplish, at all. >>> What if there is a "%.exe" pattern rule, not an explicit rule for >>> "foo.exe"? >> >> I think, it's possible to do so by finding a target as

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

On Mon, 2023-01-16 at 22:14 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: > > But this does not seem like an easy thing to accomplish, at all.  > > What if there is a "%.exe" pattern rule, not an explicit rule for > > "foo.exe"? > > I think, it's possible to do so by finding a target as GNU Make finds >

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Paul Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2023-01-16 at 00:15 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: >> Then, this patch is acceptable? Or MSYS is a special case ? > > I don't think this patch is a good idea. I said in my initial email: > >> I don't think I like this change. I understand its usefulness but in >>

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

On Mon, 2023-01-16 at 00:15 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: > Then, this patch is acceptable? Or MSYS is a special case ? I don't think this patch is a good idea. I said in my initial email: > I don't think I like this change. I understand its usefulness but in > general make never tries to

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2023 00:57:56 +0900 >> From: KO Myung-Hun >> CC: bug-make@gnu.org >> >>> How do you mean "make of mingw does not require $(EXEEXT)"? AFAICT, >>> if the Makefile defines a target FOO, and there's a file FOO.exe that >>> is up to date wrt its

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2023 00:57:56 +0900 > From: KO Myung-Hun > CC: bug-make@gnu.org > > > How do you mean "make of mingw does not require $(EXEEXT)"? AFAICT, > > if the Makefile defines a target FOO, and there's a file FOO.exe that > > is up to date wrt its dependencies, the MinGW Make will

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 23:40:57 +0900 >> From: KO Myung-Hun >> CC: bug-make@gnu.org >> >>> Please describe the use case in detail. This situation exists on >>> other platforms, not just of OS/2, and we don't do anything like that >>> for those other targets, AFAIK.

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 23:40:57 +0900 > From: KO Myung-Hun > CC: bug-make@gnu.org > > > Please describe the use case in detail. This situation exists on > > other platforms, not just of OS/2, and we don't do anything like that > > for those other targets, AFAIK. Instead, the Makefile should

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Paul Smith wrote: > On Fri, 2023-01-13 at 22:27 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: >> This pattern is usually used on UNIX. However, on OS/2, gcc creates >> foo.exe not foo when an extension is not present, and Make check foo >> only. Therefore Make tries to build foo whenever called. > > I don't

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

Hi/2. Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: KO Myung-Hun >> Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 22:27:43 +0900 >> >> For example, >> >> foo: foo.c >> gcc $@ $< >> >> This pattern is usually used on UNIX. However, on OS/2, gcc creates >> foo.exe not foo when an extension is not present, and Make check foo >>

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

On Fri, 2023-01-13 at 22:27 +0900, KO Myung-Hun wrote: > This pattern is usually used on UNIX. However, on OS/2, gcc creates > foo.exe not foo when an extension is not present, and Make check foo > only. Therefore Make tries to build foo whenever called. I don't think I like this change. I

Re: [PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

> From: KO Myung-Hun > Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 22:27:43 +0900 > > For example, > > foo: foo.c > gcc $@ $< > > This pattern is usually used on UNIX. However, on OS/2, gcc creates > foo.exe not foo when an extension is not present, and Make check foo > only. Therefore Make tries to build foo

[PATCH] Check .exe as well when a target does not exist on OS/2

For example, foo: foo.c gcc $@ $< This pattern is usually used on UNIX. However, on OS/2, gcc creates foo.exe not foo when an extension is not present, and Make check foo only. Therefore Make tries to build foo whenever called. * src/remake.c (f_mtime) [EMX]: Check a target again by