Re: [Groff] Automake migration proposal

[Ingo Schwarze]

Hi Bertrand,

Bertrand Garrigues wrote on Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 01:37:50AM +0200:
> On Mon, Aug 11 2014 at 08:59:58 PM, Ingo Schwarze <address@hidden> wrote:

>> Using $< in a non-suffix rule context is a GNUmake idiom (Makefile:8454)
>> *** Error 2 in /co/groff/build (Makefile:3654 'all')
>>
>> Please apply the following patch to the automake branch.
> 
> The use of $> in your patch doesn't work on my environment, it is
> replaced by an empty string. What is it by the way ? The only
> information I found on this symbol was a suggestion on the GNU make
> mailing list to define it as an alias to $^.

Oops, you are right, i misremembered, $> isn't standard, either.
In BSD make, $> is the list of all prerequisites for the target in
question.  Of course, replacing a GNUmake idion by a BSDmake idiom
doesn't make it any better.

> In pdfmark.am I can replace $< by the name of the file, so it
> shouldn't be a problem. 

Exactly, that's the right fix.  In inference rules, $< is fine,
and in non-inference rules, you can almost always just spell out
the prerequisite.

> In groffer.am I've made a mistake and the man files are not properly
> generated, I'll work on this tomorrow and get rid of this $<.

Fine, thanks.

> In doc.am your patch seems to work on my environment, but I don't quite
> understand why it works for you on the master branch, I've just adapted
> the doc/Makefile.sub file which uses $< in a non-suffix rule.

Heh.  The master branch works for me because the broken rules
refer to HTML documentation, and in the master branch, the HTML
doc switch isn't broken, so the broken rules aren't triggered
in my build.   >:-o

So this should probably be fixed in the master, too.

Yours,
  Ingo