The attached file contains the logs requested.
Cheers, Angelo. On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 00:12:08 +0200 (MET DST) > > From: Angelo Graziosi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > cc: make-w32@gnu.org > > > > The attached file contains the new logs obatined as follow: > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > $ ls -lrt /bin/make.* > > ... 151552 Jul 10 00:08 make.orig.exe > > ... 494678 Sep 8 21:28 make.patched.exe > > ... 16 Oct 2 22:43 make.exe -> make.patched.exe > > > > cd ~/Downloads/GFortran/gcc/.build > > ../configure .... > > make > > > > > > IT FAILS as described... > > > > cd /home/Angelo/Downloads/GFortran/gcc/.build/gcc > > make -p --debug=i 2>&1 | tee build-gfortran-make-patched.log > > > > *** Changing MAKE *** > > > > $ ls -lrt /bin/make.* > > ... 151552 Jul 10 00:08 make.orig.exe > > ... 494678 Sep 8 21:28 make.patched.exe > > ... 13 Oct 2 23:49 make.exe -> make.orig.exe > > > > > > > > make -p --debug=i 2>&1 | tee build-gfortran-make-unpatched.log > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Thanks. > > It looks like my guess about vpath was correct: the failing Make > doesn't see it. That's quite strange, since I cannot see anything in > the code that could explain the problem. Obviously, I'm missing > something... > > But before I dig deeper into the code that processes vpath, I'd like > to be absolutely sure I'm looking in the right place. So I'd like to > ask you to run one more test. At the end of this message you will > find a short Makefile, that is a very small subset of the Makefile you > have in the /home/Angelo/Downloads/GFortran/gcc/.build/gcc directory > in your gfortran source tree. Please save the file below as > /home/Angelo/Downloads/GFortran/gcc/.build/gcc/cygdos-test.mk, chdir > to /home/Angelo/Downloads/GFortran/gcc/.build/gcc, and run the > following command: > > make -p --debug=i -f cygdos-test.mk > > with both the patched and unpatched Make. If I'm right, the patched > Make should fail with the same or similar error message as you saw in > your build attempt: it should complain about "no rule to make > `cpp.texi', needed by `doc/cpp.info'"; whereas the unpatched Make > should succeed and run `makeinfo'. > > Whatever the results are, please send me the two logs produced by the > above command with each of the two versions of Make. Thanks. > > ------------------------- cut here --------------------------------------- > vpath %.texi ../../gcc/doc:../../gcc/doc/include > > doc/cpp.info: cpp.texi > > doc/%.info: %.texi > makeinfo -I . -I ../../gcc/doc -I ../../gcc/doc/include -o $@ $< > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >
cygdos-test.tar.bz2
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Make-w32 mailing list Make-w32@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/make-w32