Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2011
Hi,
I have been thinking about what to do about this one. There are 2 bogus rules
which old makes happily ignores. But makepp promises to build exactly by the
rules. OTOH, there is no syntax usable in old make to eliminate things. We
have no ambition to be able to build everything, but hope to come as close as
possible. As a member of the Perl community, not being able to build Perl is
really a failure.
Configure might be a solution. Question is how to decide which make will be
used. Right now makepp is rare enough to suppose that its presence implies it
will be used. In the future this might not be the case, so configure might
need a --with-makepp flag. But that is cumbersome and will be forgotten. It
is not better than what we have now, calling makepp --dont-build=perly.c
--dont-build=perly.h
What do you think about this, instead of ifndef a new syntax .MAKEPP_OFF: /
.MAKEPP_ON:
+.MAKEPP_OFF:
# We don't want to regenerate perly.c and perly.h, but they might
# appear out-of-date after a patch is applied or a new distribution is
-# made.
+# made. But don't lie to makepp.
perly.c: perly.y
-@sh -c true
perly.h: perly.y
-@sh -c true
+.MAKEPP_ON:
This is not the usual use of .UPPERCASE targets. Also I don't have access to
an old make to try this, but gmake ignores it just fine even with .POSIX. If
you modify my patch this way (or I can send it modified) I'd build this into
makepp.
An alternative could be for makepp to recognize this paradigm and know not to
run such a rule. But your idea can be formulated in many varieties, so it'd
need some smart checking...
coralament / best Grötens / liebe Grüße / best regards / elkorajn salutojn
Daniel Pfeiffer
--
lerne / learn / apprends / lär dig / ucz się Esperanto:
http://lernu.net / http://ikurso.net
Thread Previous