On Mon, 2019-10-21 at 07:51 +0200, David Deutsch wrote: > On 10/21/19 7:29 AM, Paul Smith wrote: > > I can only assume that the rules in question are pattern rules. If > > they were explicit rules then make would indeed give you a more clear > > declaration of which file is missing. > > Actually, I'm quite sure that they are explicit rules. I will try to put > together a simple example to recreate the issue.
OK. > > Unfortunately I didn't really understand the process you're using. Why > > do you need to write hundreds or thousands of makefiles? > > I think the process I'm using is best understood by its requirement: > Pattern rules with multiple, named %'s. I call them blueprints and they > produce makefiles that give you the set of targets and recipes to create > complex prerequisites. OK, but, make doesn't support multiple pattern characters in a single target, as you're aware. So I'm not sure what exactly you're asking us to comment on. _______________________________________________ Help-make mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
