Re: Static pattern rules with more than one '%'

2023-08-30 Thread Paul Smith
On Thu, 2023-08-31 at 00:08 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > I ended up using $(foreach ... $(eval ...)).  I didn't know about > $(eval) before reading Paul's troubleshooting guide, and it was mind > opening.  It solves a limitation I thought GNU Make had but really > hadn't.  :) You might want t

Re: Static pattern rules with more than one '%'

2023-08-30 Thread Alejandro Colomar
Hi Dmitry, On 2023-08-30 22:20, Dmitry Goncharov wrote: > On Tuesday, August 29, 2023, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> On 2023-08-29 14:45, Paul Smith wrote: >>> On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 11:32 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: Am I missing something? Is something like that allowed

Re: Static pattern rules with more than one '%'

2023-08-30 Thread Dmitry Goncharov
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On 2023-08-29 14:45, Paul Smith wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 11:32 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > >> Am I missing something? Is something like that allowed anyhow? > > > > Multiple "%" are allowed, in that they won't thr

Re: Static pattern rules with more than one '%'

2023-08-29 Thread Alejandro Colomar
Hi Paul, On 2023-08-29 14:45, Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 11:32 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> Am I missing something?  Is something like that allowed anyhow? > > Multiple "%" are allowed, in that they won't throw an error. But, only > the first "%" is replaced. The second (an

Re: Static pattern rules with more than one '%'

2023-08-29 Thread Paul Smith
On Tue, 2023-08-29 at 11:32 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote: > Am I missing something?  Is something like that allowed anyhow? Multiple "%" are allowed, in that they won't throw an error. But, only the first "%" is replaced. The second (and subsequent) "%" are just normal characters, not pattern