[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Improvement on parallel make

From: Philip Guenther
Subject: Re: Improvement on parallel make
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 06:40:07 -0700

On 12/11/06, Alexey Neyman <address@hidden> wrote:
3. BSD make associates the .WAIT semantics with a target, not with a

To clarify, are you saying that the .WAIT has no effect unless the
target whose dependency list it appears in is *somewhere* in the
dependency tree of the targets that make is actually building in this

If so, is there an example of why that sort of "three party" behavior
is actually desired instead of treating .WAIT as a global requirement
on the involved dependencies?

In the message mentioned above I described how .WAIT is implemented in
BSD make; that seems to be the "right" approach.

Which of .WAIT's semantics are actually documented goals and which are
just side-effects of how the BSD make was, in general, implemented?
If those can't be disentangled, then the whole concept actually seems
kind of suspect to me.  As is, it's apparent action-at-a-distance
would seem to invite creation of unmaintainable makefiles.

Philip Guenther

reply via email to

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