Follow-up Comment #6, bug #60736 (group make):
I think that using a warn option is better than forcing this to always warn.
But I still think that the warning makes global usage useless, and since
there's no way to control warnings on a per-target basis (today) it means the
warning is hard to use.
It seems to me that we have two different behaviors: for global .EXTRA_PREREQS
I just can't imagine anyone ever wanting to enable this warning. Can someone
show an example of a situation where it would be useful for global
.EXTRA_PREREQS?
But for target-specific .EXTRA_PREREQS I can see how it could be useful.
So maybe what we want to do instead of (or in addition to) creating the
warning is to say that the entire behavior of omitting extra prereqs as a
prerequisite to itself only applies to global .EXTRA_PREREQS; that is in the
manual instead of:
> Note @code{make} is smart enough not to add a prerequisite listed in
@code{.EXTRA_PREREQS} as a prerequisite to itself.
we make it explicit (and in the code) that this only applies to global
.EXTRA_PREREQS; something like:
> Note @code{make} is smart enough not to add a prerequisite listed in a
global setting of @code{.EXTRA_PREREQS} as a prerequisite to itself.
Then we can keep all the default behaviors, including warning about circular
dependencies using the already existing warning option for this that you
proposed in the other bug, because by definition those warnings won't apply to
global .EXTRA_PREREQS due to the special case above, but they will still apply
to target-specific .EXTRA_PREREQS.
Thoughts?
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?60736>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
