Re: Adding line numbers to output for "No rule to make target"

[thutt]

Jonny Grant writes:
 > >   If you do it that way, now you've got two different formats for the
 > >   same message.  This can be confusing to users, and certainly
 > >   complicates factors if there is software sitting on top of Make and
 > >   operating on the messages (continuous integration / automatic failure
 > >   triage).
 >
 > CI uses program return codes in my experience.
 > EXIT_SUCCESS is 0

 On failure, CI may operate on the output text to determine the locus
 of the actual failure, and automatically file defects.

 >
 > >   Consider the following other special cases:
 > >
 > >     o Gnu Make has $(eval), and it's possible to generate rules that
 > >       don't correspond to actual Makefile lines.
 >
 > I thought the message only related to targets.
 > Do you mean if targets are generated by $(eval) ?

 Yes.

 >
 > >     o What if there are multiple targets that refer to 'test.o'?
 > >       Should all be reported, or just the one that failed?
 >
 > Often compilation only reports the first occurrence of the error. Make
 > could behave in a similar way. A more advanced solution would
 > report more.

 Sure, it's software; it could do lots of things.  The point I'm
 trying to get across is that requesting a feature in a mature product
 means that many scenarios must be explored, including not breaking
 existing uses.


--
There's not enough Naugahyde in the world today.