[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: forcing a rule

From: Boris Kolpackov
Subject: Re: forcing a rule
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 13:31:46 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

Hi Noel,

> I don't suppose it should break any existing makefiles, either.

I haven't encountered any yet even though I used make with this 
patch to run, let's say, very unusual build systems found (to
name a few) in linux kernel, glibc and ACE/TAO. 

> Can you foresee any situations which will break after installing 
> the patch?

I can't think of any sane example that would break.

> I understand that Paul has put a hold on any new functions since he's 
> trying to get Guile as _the_ scripting language within makefiles so I can 
> understand why lastword, useful as it is, didn't make the cut.

Well, you are lucky that you understand. When I submitted the patch
I wasn't aware of any guile plans and a comment from Paul explaining 
this would have been in order, don't you think?

> IME with patches for CVS, this has more of a chance (although certainly no 
> guarantee) of working if there's a discussion about the feature.

Sure I have no problem with that. Let's see how our recent discussion 
about MAKEFLAGS progresses. 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]