>> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT) >> From: Aaron Shatters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> As I noted previously, there are many workarounds to this problem. I am >> interested in fixing the root cause. After all of this investigation, do we >> have consensus that this is a limitation of make? More importantly, do we >> have consensus that it should be >fixed? We seem to have run out of reasons >> for not fixing this problem. > >No, I don't agree that this is a limitation of Make. Make just >invokes the shell built-in, and the shell built-in behaves like it >does from the command line. > >I remain unconvinced that we should ``fix'' this just because this >fundamental incompatibility between shells sometimes causes trouble in >Makefiles that assume Posix `echo' where it isn't guaranteed to exist.
The problem is that Make is *not* invoking the shell built-in, therefore the command has no chance of behaving like it does from the command line. I am confused as to what level of support Make is trying to achieve. There are !unixy_shell conditions and dos cmd references all over the code. What are the purposes of these if not to handle "fundamental incompatibilities between shells". I don't understand where the point of disagreement is. I understand that this is not a bug in Make, but, in my opinion, this is a perfectly reasonable enhancement. Make knows about the existence of the windows shell 'cmd.exe'. It knows what the shell built-ins are, and it already handles this shell specially (for example, sh_cmds_dos in job.c). What reasoning is there for excluding this functionality, when all of the other specifics associated with this shell are handled? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Make-w32 mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/make-w32
