[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Make broken on master [fixed]
From: |
John Mandereau |
Subject: |
Re: Make broken on master [fixed] |
Date: |
Wed, 29 Jul 2009 20:23:44 +0200 |
Le mercredi 29 juillet 2009 à 20:13 +0200, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
> One of the most important constraints of Makefiles: You must not rely
> on the order of targets within a single rule. If necessary, you have
> to add more rules to enforce a certain order.
This is exactly what the CHAIN_RULE trick in make/ly-*.make is supposed
to do: it generates rules that ensure no several lilypond-book instances
ever run simultaneously.
> I think that this is
> exactly the cause of the problem we experience.
I think I'm outsmarted by variable assigments and evaluations instead.
Best,
John
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
- Make broken on master, Carl Sorensen, 2009/07/27
- Re: Make broken on master, John Mandereau, 2009/07/27
- Re: Make broken on master, Carl Sorensen, 2009/07/27
- Re: Make broken on master, John Mandereau, 2009/07/27
- Re: Make broken on master, Graham Percival, 2009/07/27
- Re: Make broken on master, Francisco Vila, 2009/07/28
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], John Mandereau, 2009/07/28
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], Werner LEMBERG, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], Francisco Vila, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], Werner LEMBERG, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed],
John Mandereau <=
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], John Mandereau, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], John Mandereau, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], Francisco Vila, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], John Mandereau, 2009/07/29
- Message not available
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], John Mandereau, 2009/07/29
- Re: Make broken on master [fixed], Werner LEMBERG, 2009/07/29