Re: makefile include dependency bug/feature

[Paul D. Smith]

%% Albert Ting <address@hidden> writes:

  at> We've encountered an interesting dependency problem.  Not sure if
  at> this is a bug or feature.

  at>  $ /bin/rm -rf test
  at>  $ mkdir -p test/dir1
  at>  $ touch test/dir1/file1
  at>  $ make
  at>    Makefile:13: test/file3: No such file or directory
  at>    make: *** No rule to make target `test/dir2/file2', needed by `foo'.  
Stop.

  at> It sounds like "make" gets confused when a file is being used for both an
  at> implicit rule, include file, and target dependency.  It should recognize
  at> the first implicit rule doesn't match, and reference the second implicit
  at> rule.

This does indeed look to me like a bug.  However, determining exactly
what's wrong looks like it will take some work, so I'll have to find
time for this.  I don't see the problem immediately.  It definitely does
work for "normal" patterns, so I don't know why these fail.

  at> However, if we change the BAR definition to hold the absolute
  at> path, we do get the correct behavior.

That's interesting, because it failed both ways for me.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <address@hidden>          Find some GNU make tips at:
 http://www.gnu.org                      http://make.paulandlesley.org
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist