> I think the first question is to understand what a "library state
> directory" is? Whate are you storing under it? Seems like something
> architecture independent? Are the files shareable between
> installations?
I'm talking about NGINX Unit, which stores the running configurati
I'm improving a Makefile for a project which uses [/usr/local]/var/lib
and [/usr/local]/tmp. I see there's no standard in the GNU coding
standards for directory variables.
I used the following:
tmpdir := $(prefix)/tmp
libstatedir := $(localstatedir)/lib
I developed the na
So you're saying that "should normally be" doesn't mean the "the
default value should normally be", but rather that "commonly,
people use".
Right, the _default_ value depends on _your_ system. On some systems,
it is one thing, and on other it is something else.
Which is why "you" (you i
Hi Alejandro,
I think the source of the confusion is that "Should normally be" and how
you should write a default value don't match up because it is normal to
use non-default values.
So systems are commonly set up with localstatedir=/usr/var and
runstatedir=/var/run, despite t
Oh, there _is_ a bug. Compare what the documentation says, with a bit
of variable expansion that I did to show the bug (between parentheses):
Documentation says:
$prefix
Should normally be */usr/local*
$localstatedir
Should normally be */usr/local/var*
How can $localstatedir be $prefix/var and at the same time $runstatedir
be /var/run (notice no prefix) if it is defined as $localstatedir/run.
Because prefix is normally /usr, and it was/is common to use /usr/var
for exactly that purpose. Where as runstatedir was in /var/run and
not /usr.
> Is there some way of detecting or specifying that a Makefile is GNU
> make specific?
Name the file GNUmakefile?
Hard to rename other peoples stuff.
Is there some way of detecting or specifying that a Makefile is GNU
make specific? I'm kinda thinking of something similar to the .POSIX
directive.
I'm in a situation where got a bunch of Makefiles, some BSD makefile,
some GNU, some POSIX and to somehow handle this without having to
remeber if on
What are the intended semantics of the following snippet,
target: foo=zork
target:
ifeq ($(foo),zork)
@echo "zork zork"
else
@echo "bork bork"
endif
I'm thinking that it should print "zork zork" -- target specific
variables a
I'm interested in finding some examples of proprietary software
products (ie, non-GPL licensed) that distribute a copy of GNU make
(preferably a binary, with or without changes to the GNU make
source code) with the product. If you are aware of such a product,
I would appreciate a re
define starts a macro. Everything from the start of the macro to
endef is just text and is not evaluated.
So your inner "define" is not recognised - it's just treated as
text. That means that the dirst endef matches the first define and
all the other endefs seem to have no corresp
Hey Martin, sorry for the delay when it came to posting this patch.
Here is a small patch that adds a new option to make that causes make
to abort after N failures. Martin suggest that -k should take an
extra argument where the user can tell make to abort after N failures,
quite useful if you wa
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
#include
int main()
{
return 0;
}
I really believe what you guys do is a crap.
PEBKAC. This for example has nothing to do with GNU Make, and is
completely related to your broken code. You have forgotten
These days, spam is a huge percentage of all email and the open
source mailing lists are no exception. In order to allow anyone to
report problems and ask for help many OSS mailing lists don't
require you to subscribe before posting... that means that someone
has to go through and l
Well, for you that's true since you read info-gnu as well. I
expect that this applies to an extremely small minority of Debian
users though.
I think that the amount of people who read the NEWS file is about the
same as the amount of people who read info-gnu. :(
Cheers.
___
It's not clear to me what the problem is with having a late beta of
GNU make installed into Debian unstable. If these changes are
going to be in the next release would it really have made much
difference to wait for that?
The problem is that you don't get the chance to read the NEWS f
I have some surprisingly good statistics. In ALT Linux Sisyphus
(repository with 5000+ source packages) percentage of packages
You have fallen for the trap that Linux is a operating system, which
it is not; it is simply a kernel. The operating system you are
actually refering to is an vari
I still believe the change is localized and not widespread enough
to justify supporting both behaviors... hopefully I'm not whistling
past the graveyard.
I don't know if I should take your word for it, or if I should compile
lots of things (old and new) with the beta make and report what
At this point I'm not considering backing out this change. First,
GNU make absolutely _IS_ an implementation of POSIX standard for
make: you only have to read as far as the second paragraph in the
GNU make manual:
> GNU make conforms to section 6.2 of IEEE Standard 1003.2-1992
>
Hey,
Please revert the POSIX_ME_HARDER change of backslash-newline
sequences are handled. There is absolutley no reason to break this.
Lots of old Makefile use it, and so do many new ones. If one wishes
to follow POSIX, one can make this the default setting when
POSIX_ME_HARDER (usually known as
s something like
jm> "1:0.4+20031231-1", and make doesn't like this, due to the
jm> colon in the path.
Correct. You can't include ":" as part of a target or prerequisite
name in GNU make (at least not reliably).
Then this should be documented in
21 matches
Mail list logo
