[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CVS psmith make: Various cleanups reported by people using the alpha
From: |
Paul D. Smith |
Subject: |
Re: CVS psmith make: Various cleanups reported by people using the alpha release. |
Date: |
Mon, 8 Jul 2002 11:59:56 -0400 |
%% Greg McGary <address@hidden> writes:
gm> "Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>" <address@hidden> writes:
>> Incorporate "order-only" prerequisites patch. Wrote a test for it.
>> The test shows what might be a bug in the code; I need to look at it
>> more closely (anyway it doesn't behave as I expected).
gm> I can debug it this morning, if that helps you.
I'm at work right now so I need to set some things up before I can
reproduce the problem.
Basically the thing I noted was this: if you have a prereq which is both
normal and order-only, then $? does not contain that prereq even if it
changed.
I tried something like this
foo : bar | baz
@echo '$$? = $?'
touch $@
foo: baz
.PHONY: baz
bar baz:
touch $@
Now the first time it all looks correct (IIRC) but the second time $? is
empty even though baz was changed (it's .PHONY after all).
Anyway, this is from memory from last night... what I think should
happen in this case is that the order-only-ness of that prereq should be
removed and it should be treated as just a normal prereq: after all,
order-only prereqs are a strict subset of normal prereqs.
Then the question becomes, should $| be empty? I don't know for sure
but I think that would be OK (and it's better than $? being empty, IMO).
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <address@hidden> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist