[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

: None ___ Follow-up Comments: --- Date: Sat 19 Aug 2023 05:49:19 PM UTC By: Tim A *lot* of people would like to be able to print all the targets contained in a Makefile. Here's the most popular St

[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #64571 (project make): @mrsquee yeah I also found it confusing since there are some open patches but "Submit new" is disabled with no clue why. I think I read somewhere that they want you to just submit bugs with a patch attached, so that's what I did. Very unintuitive.

[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #64571 (project make): > I'm just not really that convinced that the simplest thing is going to be useful to people. People are already using hacky regexes which are even less useful. > even internal ones etc Yeah there were some internal targets that I didn't want to

[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

Follow-up Comment #7, bug#64571 (group make): To be honest I'm not sure I know enough about Make to answer in detail, but generally people want to know targets for which they might actually type `make thetarget`, so: > I assume users only care about explicit targets, not implicit targets (pattern

[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

Follow-up Comment #14, bug#64571 (group make): I think JSON would be a good solution. > (b) these tools (like jq for example) are not part of most standard systems and so can't be relied on to exist everywhere, It's no harder to install `jq` than it is to install `make` these days, even on relat

[bug #64571] Add option to print targets

Follow-up Comment #18, bug#64571 (group make): Amazing, thank you Paul! And I agree with David A. Wheeler - this option makes sense for things like command line autocomplete. JSON makes sense for things like IDE integration. ___ Reply to

"Exception handling" ?

ake logs that show the start and end of a rule - which makes it slightly more parsable. What do you think? Regards, Tim -- http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/ ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: GNU make to consider files checksum

ile only 2. Comments changed but nothing else 3. Source control system says file has not changed so even though it was checked out and has a new mtime, don't rebuild it. That's just my 2 pence :-) Regards, Tim On 12/04/2008, Giuseppe Scrivano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Fwd: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile

Sorry, forgot to send this to bug-make as well. -- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2008/6/6 Subject: Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, # do "equal" by seeing if

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile

Hi, I have amended an example of how to use $(and) that I posted earlier for Rakesh. I have tested this on Linux with make 3.81. It shows a crude way and a slightly more sophisticated way to use $(and) in an if statement to determine if two variables have equal values: A=2 > B=4 > > # do "equal

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) inmakefile

e macro also reverses the subst and tries to subst 22 into 2 which obviously catches the problem: $(if $(1:$(2)=),,$(if $(2:$(1)=),,T)) note the second $(if) I am not sure about eq with lists, though. Perhaps it has some problem there? Cheers, Tim 2008/6/17 Martin Dorey <[EMAIL

Re: Enhancement request: Watch source files for changes

write the script. It would be really efficient for make to act as a kind of continuously running dependency database, where you could tell it about changes and it would recompute actions. I am not an expert on the source code but I think it is a fairly large change to try to apply to make. Regards,

Re: [bug #25751] Add option to output dependency info as xml

ually edit makefiles. This is a kind of step on the way in that it puts the dependencies into a format that a gui could parse fairly easily. Regards, Tim 2009/3/2 anonymous : > > URL: >  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?25751> > >                 Summary: Ad

Fwd: error make

-- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 2009/4/12 Subject: Re: error make To: Richard Alexis Gomez Medina Hi, This is not a problem with gnu make but with the driver that you are trying to compile or with the kernel that you are compiling it for. To me it looks like

Re: make 3.81 + i386-pc-interix* parallelism problem, and "write error"

something to do with the job server blocking or just a bit of odd logic for interix. It's not easy to debug this without having the os and a debugger in front of you. Regards, Tim 2009/5/6 Markus Duft : > On Tue, 2009-03-24 at 07:06 +0100, Markus Duft wrote: >> On Tue, 2009-03-17

Re: make 3.81 + i386-pc-interix* parallelism problem, and "write error"

Hi 2009/5/6 Markus Duft : > On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 09:02 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: >> Do you really need it? Do you use sub-makes (i.e. do you have >> makefiles that call make again on other makefiles)? > > hmm. we're using automake, so i guess yes, every subdir is man

[bug #26887] intermediate files declared INTERMEDIATE are made PRECIOUS

URL: Summary: intermediate files declared INTERMEDIATE are made PRECIOUS Project: make Submitted by: timbrown Submitted on: Thu 25 Jun 2009 15:53:45 GMT Severity: 3 - Normal

[bug #26887] intermediate files declared INTERMEDIATE are made PRECIOUS

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #26887 (project make): I've written, but not *thoroughly* tested the attached patch. Forgive me, but I'm not au fait with CVS etc. (to the extent that I can't get autoconf to work on my system) so I'll just drop the file here and if someone wants to wrestle me into doin

[bug #26887] intermediate files declared INTERMEDIATE are made PRECIOUS

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #26887 (project make): Apologies... reverse patch. This should be better. (file #18320) ___ Additional Item Attachment: File name: Savannah.26887.gmake.implicit.c.patch-2 Size:1 KB

Re: Why "*** extraneous `endef'. Stop."?

o corresponding define statement. In other words, you cannot nest defines like that. Also note that ifneq doesn't have any effect inside a define - it only has an effect when you $(eval) the macro. Cheers, Tim 2009/9/6 Sergey Zubkovsky : > Hi, > Why the below makefile fails with th

Why "*** extraneous `endef'. Stop."?

-- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 2009/9/6 Subject: Re: Why "*** extraneous `endef'. Stop."? To: a...@gnu.org Oh dear - sorry - I'm an idiot. All I can say is that the ifneq statement is what makes it go wrong for me.  Using $(if works for me

Re: GNU make to consider files checksum

md5 checksum dependencies in make of course, using temporary marker files, but it's a bit ugly and complicated.. Regards, Tim 2009/9/29 Giuseppe Scrivano : > Philip Guenther writes: > >> (Have you measured how often this sort of thing would save >> recompilation and/o

Re: GNU make to consider files checksum

Hi :-) 2009/10/5 : > > Tim Murphy wrote: >> I think that checksumming might benefit some targets.  It would be >> nice to be able to implement different "methods" for different targets >> - because not all methods work well in all circumstances. > >> I

Re: Prioritizing non-dependent targets in parallel make

as the basis for the next attempt. One would have to check for patents on this, I think. Regards, Tim 2009/12/24 tom honermann : > I'm working on optimizing our GNU make based build system to reduce build > times.  Consider the > following dependencies with these run times for

Re: Prioritizing non-dependent targets in parallel make

2010/1/4 Eric Melski : > > Hi Tim! > > ElectricAccelerator doesn't factor runtimes into scheduling decisions, > although we have talked about doing so in the past.  I spent some time > investigating the possibility, most recently a couple years ago.  What I did > was twe

Re: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

the shell for make and talon in turn runs whatever the actual shell is but adds the serialisation. there are a lot of other nice things you can do with this - e.g. measuring the execution time of every build step so that you can see what affects performance. Regards, Tim On 30 July 2010 09:28

Re: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

On 30 July 2010 09:55, Chiheng Xu wrote: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: >> Hi, >> > >> >> You set talon as the shell for make and talon in turn runs whatever >> the actual shell is but adds the serialisation.  there are a lot of >&

Re: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

fred fred.cpp perl makedef.pl -i something.def perl prepdef.pl -i otherthing.def error: fred.cpp: syntax error on line 345 ERROR: File not Found Which file was missing? If you can't change the tool to print every detail then what do you do? Regards, Tim On 30 July 2010 11:16, Howar

Re: Fwd: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

characters to escape the end-of-line: mytarget: ->command1 && ->command2 && ->command3 Note that I'm using bash syntax here. On windows if you want to use cmd.exe then good luck - I don't think it's really fit for purpose. Regards, Tim On 3 August 2010 02:11,

Fwd: Import statement - non-recursive make implementation

Sorry - messed up the reply-to-all. -- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 7 September 2010 15:12 Subject: Re: Import statement - non-recursive make implementation To: psm...@gnu.org Hi, I think I can guess and if I'm wrong then please ignore this. One wants to

Re: Fwd: Import statement - non-recursive make implementation

Why didn't you do this 4 years ago darnit? ;-) Cheers, Tim On 7 September 2010 17:40, Kamil Mierzejewski wrote: > Hi, > > Tim, your explanation of the problem is exactly what I want to deal with, > and... > >> Does this change sort that out so that: >> 1) all t

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

n't take more than X megabytes of output per task and in very large parallel builds there are good reasons for having limits like this anyhow. Regards, Tim On 14 April 2011 19:12, David Boyce wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> David, can you explai

Fwd: patch to support output synchronization under -j

-- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 14 April 2011 20:43 Subject: Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j To: psm...@gnu.org The reason for splitting stderr and stdout is to do with deadlock and reading pipes. IIRC.  e.g. blocking on a read to stderr which

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

That was a confused email - apologies. I will rethink it and return. :-) On 14 April 2011 20:43, Tim Murphy wrote: > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Tim Murphy > Date: 14 April 2011 20:43 > Subject: Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j > To:

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

up. How do you know what order they should be in in the output? SeS, SSe or eSS? So one theory goes -ah forget it. Regards Tim On 14 April 2011 20:46, Tim Murphy wrote: > That was a confused email - apologies.  I will rethink it and return. :-) > > On 14 April 2011 20:43, Tim Murp

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

hat method one uses) but that's not generally such a problem. Regards, Tim On 14 April 2011 21:18, Paul Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 20:59 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: >> To prevent any kind of deadlock you sort of want to empty everything >> the stderr and stdout pipe

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

to be highly parsable. Humans only get called in when there are errors. My longest running tasks are much shorter than the build itself so not getting progress info on them is not a killer. Regards, Tim On 15 April 2011 11:45, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:15:15 -0400 &g

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

tasks would be so short as to give up the console quickly but a long running task would be sure to get the console as much as it needed it. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimb

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

I wish I could play with one of those Connection machines and find out about the bottlenecks at j=0.25*cpus that I can see on some machines :-( Regards, Tim On 15 April 2011 19:32, Howard Chu wrote: > Eli Zaretskii wrote: >>> >>> Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 10:37:13 -0400

Re: patch to support output synchronization under -j

mething similar: mytarget: PARALLELSYNC= mytarget: $(MAKE) -f submake.mk Then submake.mk carries on as normal. The problem is that David is not using semaphores so I haven't thought how to spin it for his case. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent peopl

Re: New Feature Submission for GNU Make

>>filename) # appending info statements to a file without invoking $(shell) (also need > to create) $(cdr LIST) # perhaps can be done with $(words) - not so sure on this. I can't see the point of developing new versions if they can't have new features. Regards, Tim On 13 June 201

Re: suggestion: new make function

to the file and allowing one to perform quite complicated actions such as writing and reading from sockets although it is perhaps not all that "functional." Regards, Tim - Show quoted text - -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a dona

Re: [rfc] Colorized output for GNU make?

d software that can summarise and extract interesting information from a huge quantity of output. Regards, Tim On 3 October 2011 17:22, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Hello again, > > > > it would be great to have some feedback on this - anyone? > > > To re-summarize: > >

Re: make error

Your makefile is trying to execure a directory rather than a program. Cheers, Tim On 5 October 2011 15:48, Carolina Carneiro wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to use make to compile the drivers of a program I have to use, > called MOCASSIN. > But when I type make mocassin,

Re: make error

le should probably have "ifort" on the end - as examples: /opt/intel/composer_xe_2011_sp1.6.233/bin/ifort or maybe /opt/intel/composer_xe_2011_sp1.6.233/ifort you could try finding it like this: find /opt/intel/composer_xe_2011_sp1.6.233 -type f -iname 'ifort' Regards, T

fix for make gaining jobserver tokens

y-one error in cleanup code that is almost never run. Attached is a patch that fixes it. We've been running with it for over 5 days now and haven't noticed any problems. Tim From 2fc5429506b6c1221992f91f5d608598067e3f21 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tim Newsome Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011

Re: fix for make gaining jobserver tokens

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 13:34 -0700, Tim Newsome wrote: > > We do a lot of builds (as in double-digit servers building non-stop). > > Sometimes, when a part of the build fails, make -j8 would die with: > > make: INT

targets/SECONDARY TEST#9 fails sometimes

2.b 2.c cp 1.b 1.c rm 1.b 2.b I can think of two ways to fix this: 1. Make 2.c depend on 1.c. 2. Change the verification code to accept both orders. What is the right solution? Tim ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: targets/SECONDARY TEST#9 fails sometimes

Does anybody know what the right solution to this problem is? I'm happy to implement/test either one, but I don't want to spend my time working on a solution that won't be accepted upstream. Tim On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Tim Newsome wrote: > TEST #9 in targets/SECONDA

Re: 'withfile' function implementation

uot;filename",value) $(appendfile "filename",value) would probably be quite nice and they don't absolutely demand that one use the C library mode flags (w,w+,a etc). This is one thing that Paul didn't like from the previous suggestions. Regards, Tim On 15 December 2011 2

Re: 'withfile' function implementation

I think that looks ok. There might be some question about how the variable "$(FILE)" would look if you tried to iterate over its contents. e.g. would one see an iteration for each word and with "\n"s marking lines or is each line an "atom" for want of a better w

Re: [bug #35485] New $(.MFDIR) built-in variable

Hi, I know this is tangential, but: MAKEFILE_LIST itself is a problem for non-recursive builds because it gets very big if you have a lot of include statements (as opposed to a gigantic single makefile file). Regards, Tim On 8 February 2012 18:30, David Boyce wrote: > URL: >

Re: [bug #35485] New $(.MFDIR) built-in variable

oth) - it was something to do with which drive letter got stuck on to a relative path (e.g. off the CWD) to make it absolute and this possibly not always being the drive letter you wanted. Again this is unsubstantiated since my emails about that are stuck in some old Lotus notes database. Rega

Re: Dump the database to a makefile and invoke make on the dumped makefile.

ld be directly re-readable. Regards, Tim 2012/2/18 Torbjörn Svensson : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hello list, > > > The short version > Is there any way to make make dump it's database to a makefile and > then reuse that dumped makefile

Re: Dump the database to a makefile and invoke make on the dumped makefile.

d. Working well on the micro scale is sometimes at odds with working well at the macro scale and an ideal make tool would somehow help one to deal with that without one having to maintain different and very complicated makefiles for each situation. Regards, Tim On 26 February 2012 19:51, Paul Sm

[bug #35764] features/file test will fail in non-English environments

URL: Summary: features/file test will fail in non-English environments Project: make Submitted by: scfcde Submitted on: Do 08 Mär 2012 18:05:43 GMT Severity: 3 - Normal I

Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

at. There is also nothing stopping you from loading the same plugin twice at the moment and it needs more tests and some documentation so I realise that this patch is not right yet. There is one set of modifications to main.c to add calls to load_plugin() which is in a new file, manage-plugins.c, and th

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

ng up variable values at the least is also probably important. Another thing I've wanted for ages is to be able to know if some target was declared already - I want plugins to have the ability to look at make's target database if possible although not necessarily modify it. Rega

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

Hi, On 5 April 2012 23:12, Paul Smith wrote: > Hi Tim; > > Before going too much further note that I've got a semi-implemented > "load" operator in my source already, which fulfills a similar function > except in a less sophisticated way: it just calls a functio

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

an environment variable. I am initialising the plugins quite early but I don't think that it's critical to do so - hence adding syntax is quite possible. I was trying to avoid doing that because it's always so controversial but since Paul already has a plan for syntax... Regards

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

Hi :-) On 6 April 2012 01:16, Paul Smith wrote: > On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 23:59 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: >> I see the value in a plugin system as being that I don't have to >> recompile the plugins for every version of make. In a way it's tending >> towards "wh

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

gin()" which will use whatever method is required and the plugin initialiser will get called with some information and that's about it. If one suddenly decides to use a library midway through for some reason then that's great - shouldn't matter. If using a new library causes the

Fwd: How to get make result

Hi, Use the -n option. make -n This shows what would happen but doesn't do anything.  It's not precisely what you want but it's the closest thing. Regards, Tim On 1 May 2012 10:46, ?? wrote: > Hello, my english not vell. > I try to explain my tack.

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

s are involved), logging what recipes failed with the return code so on are other use cases. You can do a lot of this if you write your makefiles specially but that's not much use for building things written by other people or other tools. Regards, Tim On 12 May 2012 06:38, Samkit J

Re:[bug #17873] .NOTPARALLEL enhancements

ib1.a bdir/lib2.a .. adir1/lib1.a: cd lib1 && make Etc. At least this seem to be about dependencies where the other form is basically a script that says do x,y,z in precisely my chosen order. One could write it better in bash than make. Regards, Tim On May 31,

Re: Feature request: silently overriding existing rules

d and another to remove it would offer a complete api. Regards, Tim On Aug 11, 2012 1:32 AM, "Stefano Lattarini" wrote: > On 08/11/2012 01:27 AM, David Boyce wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Stefano Lattarini > > wrote: > >> I have no answer for tha

Re: Feature request: silently overriding existing rules

For the sake of understanding you properly, if you can detect, remove and add targets then 'replacing the recipe silently' is just these three operations in sequence, right? We can already add targets but not the other two. Cheers, Tim On Aug 11, 2012 10:53 AM, "Stefano Lattarini

Re: Patch to allow make to load plugins that add new functions.

ave some regression tests added, documentation, autoconf, etc. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/friends/ ___ Bug-make mailing list

Re: Dependency violation in parallel build (3.82, regression)

It would be nicest to actually use git (or if we were in heaven, Mercurial)! :-) Cheers, Tim On 3 January 2013 20:20, Frank Heckenbach wrote: >> > BTW, I wanted to check against the current repository version, but >> > when I tried to fetch it as described on >> > h

Re: Quirk with rules producing multiple output files

There are commercial emulations of GNU make that can handle multiple outputs. I don't want to plug them because that might be annoying. It's just worth mentioning that it can be done. Regards, Tim On 11 April 2013 11:14, Reinier Post wrote: > On Thu Apr 4 16:17:58 2013, psm...@

Re: Quirk with rules producing multiple output files

ind a better explanation than I can give. Regards, Tim On 11 April 2013 19:35, David Sankel wrote: > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: > >> There are commercial emulations of GNU make that can handle multiple >> outputs. I don't want to plug them becaus

Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

o see where one rule ended and the next one began. When most rules are a single job this doesn't seem important but when you're doing anything non trivial it becomes hard to see what is where. Regards, Tim On 16 April 2013 09:56, Tim Murphy wrote: > This is an awesome feature, esp

Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

_OUTPUT=endrule $@ $(timestamp) Then I'd use my plugin skills to write a $(timestamp) function. Regards, Tim On 16 April 2013 13:43, Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2013-04-16 at 09:57 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: > > When most rules are a single job this doesn't seem important but

Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

e top-level make executable's PID should be good enough. This is used to create the named semaphore. Platforms without semaphores might use a file and locking or if that doesn't work then they can't implement the feature and you configure it out. Regards, Tim On 24 Apr

Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

why not use a named semaphore wherever possible (windows and linux) and lock a file where not instead of trying to pass kernel object handles around (seems a bit nasty to me)? On 24 April 2013 21:19, Paul Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 22:39 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Nothing is ac

Fwd: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

-- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 25 April 2013 07:13 Subject: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch To: "Paul D. Smith" To be honest, I have done all this before with named semaphores including the "file that gets left over"

Re: Fwd: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

nd you pre-delete ones that by incredible luck might exist before make started and have the same name as the one you want to use. 4) In a way this makes the file-lock and semaphore mechanisms "look" rather the same - files in /tmp. This seems easier to understand. It's no big deal, tho

Re: Fwd: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch

On 25 April 2013 20:06, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 19:36:28 +0100 > > From: Tim Murphy > > Cc: "bug-make@gnu.org" > > > > 1) sem_timedwait() in posix lets you timeout so in a big build when > > something crashes or jus

Re: Default output-sync setting (was: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch)

ndroid build and you can make a decision after that? Heck, lets try it with various things and be happy it works. Regards, Tim On 29 April 2013 03:53, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Paul Smith > > Cc: bug-make@gnu.org > > Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2013 22:03:39 -0400 > > > &g

Re: Default output-sync setting (was: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch)

On 29 April 2013 16:19, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 09:58:50 +0100 > > From: Tim Murphy > > Cc: "bug-make@gnu.org" > > > > try interpreting error messages from compiler/tool X when they're 10 > > lines from the file that

Re: Dynamic objects (was: .ONESEHLL not working as expected in 3.82)

f (strcmp (funcname, "test-expand") == 0) return test_expand (argv[0]); if (strcmp (funcname, "test-eval") == 0) return test_eval (argv[0]); return strdup ("unknown"); } That strdup at the end should be a gmk_strdup() if possible. :-) Prob

Re: Default output-sync setting (was: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch)

cc fred.c -c -o fred.o cc bob.c -c -o bob.o error on line 20 -X error on line 30 - error on line 330 - makefile:342: recipe for target 'fred.o' failed makefile:350: recipe for target 'bob.o' failed ? Regards, Tim On 29 April 2013 18:25, Eli Zaretskii wrote: &

Re: Dynamic objects (was: .ONESEHLL not working as expected in 3.82)

with this already? The same way would be fine for the plugin and it would be nice to not simply push that problem on to all plugin writers. Cheers, Tim On 29 April 2013 18:59, Paul Smith wrote: > On Mon, 2013-04-29 at 19:33 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Paul Smith > &

Re: Default output-sync setting (was: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch)

Come now - the broken excuse is an excuse. There's plenty of crap free software out there and some poor bastard trying to build it who can't change the source because the people who own it think it should be make's problem. :-) Cheers, Tim On 29 April 2013 19:00, Philip

Re: Default output-sync setting (was: Re: [bug #33138] .PARLLELSYNC enhancement with patch)

One doesn't have to suffer the problems and learn the option exists afterwards. In the end I can understand why a new feature might not be default to start with - until a lot of people have used it and are sure that it works everywhere. Cheers, Tim On 29 April 2013 20:21, Eli Zaretskii

Re: Dynamic objects (was: .ONESEHLL not working as expected in 3.82)

On 29 April 2013 20:12, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:19:09 +0100 > > From: Tim Murphy > > Cc: "Paul D. Smith" , "bug-make@gnu.org" < > bug-make@gnu.org> > > > > > 2. The fact that the dynamic object's file

Re: dynamic object searching (was: Re: Dynamic objects)

Since you can't (in my recent experience) load a 64-bit DLL into a 32-bit program, the real issue is what architecture was make itself built with. It's sort of a matter of make identifying itself rather than telling you that you're running on ubuntu 13.04 or solaris 10. Regard

Re: Some serious issues with the new -O option

ght make things more interactive, Per-target syncing is a valid compromise. Regards, Tim On 30 April 2013 10:48, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > I'm sorry to say that the new -O option can interact *badly* > with Automake-generated parallel testsuites (at least when they > are being run

Re: Some serious issues with the new -O option

What I mean is that: ./make -Otarget might be a good interactive default rather than -Omake. Colouring is another issue which I would imagine could be done another way to let us have the best of both worlds. Regards, Tim On 30 April 2013 10:55, Tim Murphy wrote: > I'm guessing he

Re: Some serious issues with the new -O option

t the log of a build you did yesteday? It's still very nice to be able to distinguish things by colour later on. Regards, Tim On 30 April 2013 11:16, Stefano Lattarini wrote: > On 04/30/2013 12:01 PM, Tim Murphy wrote: > > What I mean is that: > > > > ./make -

Re: dynamic object searching (was: Re: Dynamic objects)

t indicate whether the plugin is 32 or 64 bit. So to me it just seems like a complication because it can't solve the whole problem that make generally needs explicit effort to support builds on multiple platforms. Regards, Tim -- You could help some brave and

Re: dynamic object searching (was: Re: Dynamic objects)

make second guessing your decisions. Regards, Tim On 30/04/2013, Paul Smith wrote: > On Tue, 2013-04-30 at 17:48 +0100, Tim Murphy wrote: >> i.e. I don't just have >> load X.dll > >> I have to supply the recipe to build it on windows: > >> X.dll: >>

Re: Some serious issues with the new -O option

b the lock might have a full buffer already. It might appear to be less choppy. Not sure how it would perform. Regards, Tim On 2 May 2013 03:53, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Paul Smith > > Cc: stefano.lattar...@gmail.com, bug-make@gnu.org > > Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 16

Re: Another issue with -O?

I've done the "external utility" solution and only because we absolutely had no other choice - it's not much fun and can be done much more effectively by make itself. Regards, Tim On 3 May 2013 14:16, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Paul Smith > > Date: Fri, 0

load directive - module parameters

hook so that it can deallocate resources cleanly. Cheers, Tim -- You could help some brave and decent people to have access to uncensored news by making a donation at: http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/friends/ ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org h

Re: [bug #39943] Add an alternative parsing mode that regards space and tab as identical tokens

d past the example and it messes up in an extremely odd way. It would be nice even if make was able to guess what might be happening and issue a warning (although in a way I think one might well go the whole hog). Regards, Tim On 4 September 2013 23:32, Paul Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2013-0

Re: [bug #39943] Add an alternative parsing mode that regards space and tab as identical tokens

ah, interesting - good point. My standard (at least the enforced standard where I work) is 4-spaces and it doesn't catch that. On 5 September 2013 10:44, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2013 10:38:16 +0100 >> From: Tim Murphy >> Cc: Byron Hawkins , >>

Re: [bug #39943] Add an alternative parsing mode that regards space and tab as identical tokens

d finally enforcement of something. Regards, Tim On 5 September 2013 11:18, Tim Murphy wrote: > ah, interesting - good point. My standard (at least the enforced > standard where I work) is 4-spaces and it doesn't catch that. > > On 5 September 2013 10:44, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

Fwd: [bug #39943] Add an alternative parsing mode that regards space and tab as identical tokens

forgot to cc the list - oops. -- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy Date: 5 September 2013 14:30 Subject: Re: [bug #39943] Add an alternative parsing mode that regards space and tab as identical tokens To: "Paul D. Smith" warning and finally enforcement of

Re: [bug #40225] Deterministic output ordering

It's like putting slick types on a 1920s car - it might help but it's still a long way off modern designs. Regards, Tim On 10 October 2013 06:29, Frank Heckenbach wrote: > Paul D. Smith wrote: > >> A non-parallel build is actually fully deterministic for a given mak

  1   2   >