On 12/11/06, Alexey Neyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ...
3. BSD make associates the .WAIT semantics with a target, not with a dependency.
To clarify, are you saying that the .WAIT has no effect unless the target whose dependency list it appears in is *somewhere* in the dependency tree of the targets that make is actually building in this run? If so, is there an example of why that sort of "three party" behavior is actually desired instead of treating .WAIT as a global requirement on the involved dependencies?
In the message mentioned above I described how .WAIT is implemented in BSD make; that seems to be the "right" approach.
Which of .WAIT's semantics are actually documented goals and which are just side-effects of how the BSD make was, in general, implemented? If those can't be disentangled, then the whole concept actually seems kind of suspect to me. As is, it's apparent action-at-a-distance would seem to invite creation of unmaintainable makefiles. Philip Guenther _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list Help-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
