op all logic for the testsuite/.test-rules.make file.
I've pushed some changes to the branch require-gnu-make. So far, this
branch simplifies the dep files logic, and replaces all suffix rules by
pattern rules.
I haven't yet looked at deleting testsuite/.testrules.make. I wonder if
static patter
On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 10:54:02 +0100
ni...@lysator.liu.se (Niels Möller) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's been pointed out to me that GNU make documentation of old-fashioned
> suffix rules say
>
> :Suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites of their own. If they
> : have any, they are treated as normal
Daniel P. Berrangé writes:
> So I'd flip the question. Is there any compelling benefit to supporting
> non-GNU make ?
Not that I'm aware of, but I'd like to hear any other opinions before
proceeding. It was a lot more common with proprietary unices with vendor
tools back when Nettle was
On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 10:54:02AM +0100, Niels Möller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's been pointed out to me that GNU make documentation of old-fashioned
> suffix rules say
>
> :Suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites of their own. If they
> : have any, they are treated as normal files with funny
Hi,
it's been pointed out to me that GNU make documentation of old-fashioned
suffix rules say
:Suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites of their own. If they
: have any, they are treated as normal files with funny names, not as
: suffix rules. Thus, the rule:
:
: .c.o: foo.h
:
