[bug #64428] Document how to simplify debug output.

Update of bug#64428 (group make): Status:None => Duplicate Open/Closed:Open => Closed Operating System:None => Any Triage Status:

Re: How to create symlinks for shared library with soname

Hi Paul, I just come across the ldconfig manual. It seems it prefers the chained links like the CMake does too. ``` ldconfig expects a certain pattern to how the symbolic links are set up,  like this example, where the middle file (libfoo.so.1 here)  is  the SONAME for the library:     libfoo

?????? How to create symlinks for shared library with soname

Hi, Paul! Thank you and happy new year!

Re: How to create symlinks for shared library with soname

On Mon, 2024-01-01 at 04:20 +0800, lijh8 wrote: > libtool creates both symlinks to the real library file.  > But CMake creates one symlink to the real file and another symlink to > the first symlink. > > I'm sticking with manual Makefile but which way should I follow? First, I don't think this is

How to create symlinks for shared library with soname

Hi community, I just happen to notice that how symbolic links are created for library with soname. libtool creates both symlinks to the real library file.  But CMake creates one symlink to the real file and another symlink to the first symlink. I'm sticking with manual Makefile but which wa

[bug #64428] Document how to simplify debug output.

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #64428 (project make): Paul, please use sv64428_2.diff (the other patch has a typo). ___ Reply to this item at: ___ Message se

[bug #64428] Document how to simplify debug output.

Additional Item Attachment, bug #64428 (project make): File name: sv64428_2.diff Size:5 KB ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #64428] Document how to simplify debug output.

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #64428 (project make): This patch documents how to simplify make debug output. (file #54928) ___ Additional Item Attachment: File name: sv64428.diff Size:5 KB <https://file.savannah.gnu.

[bug #64428] Document how to simplify debug output.

URL: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64428> Summary: Document how to simplify debug output. Group: make Submitter: dgoncharov Submitted: Sat 15 Jul 2023 03:17:03 PM UTC Severity: 3 - Normal

Reg: How to enable extension in Riscv (A,B,M,C...)

Hi, I am working on the RISCV 64 tool using spike simulator and gnu tool chain I am unable to run the atomic and other instructions which are having extensions and in my gnu toolchain all the extensions are available can any one please help me how to enable the extensions and run these test files

Re: subst: Mention how to deal with a FROM that has commas in it

On Sat, 2023-03-18 at 16:41 +0800, Dan Jacobson wrote: > Or mention that there is no way to deal with it. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Syntax-of-Functions.html Cheers!

Re: subst: Mention how to deal with a FROM that has commas in it

st ee,EE,feet on the street) produces the value 'fEEt on the strEEt'. OK, but also do mention how to deal with a FROM that has commas in it. It's mentioned somewhere else. And this works for me: comma := , default: @echo '$(subst ee$(comma),EE$(comma),fee$(co

subst: Mention how to deal with a FROM that has commas in it

) produces the value 'fEEt on the strEEt'. OK, but also do mention how to deal with a FROM that has commas in it. Or mention that there is no way to deal with it.

[bug #62898] Document how to use variables to hide special characters

Update of bug #62898 (project make): Status:None => Fixed Assigned to:None => psmith Open/Closed:Open => Closed Component Version:

Re: How to disable Guile?

On Jul 20 2019, Paul Smith wrote: > On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 20:55 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: >> checking whether closedir returns void... no >> ./configure: line 9660: PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG: command not found >> ./configure: line 9672: syntax error near unexpected token `GUILE,' >> ./configure: lin

Re: How to disable Guile?

On Wed, 2019-07-17 at 20:55 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > checking whether closedir returns void... no > ./configure: line 9660: PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG: command not found > ./configure: line 9672: syntax error near unexpected token `GUILE,' > ./configure: line 9672: ` PKG_CHECK_MODULES(GUILE, guile

RE: How to disable Guile?

Hi Jeffrey, On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 20:55:48 -0400, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > I'm trying to build Make 4.2.1 from the release tarball on an antique system. > I've tried configuring with without a guile option, --without-guile and -- > disable-guile. In each case the tail of configure results in: > ./co

Re: How to disable Guile?

> On 18 Jul 2019, at 01:55, Jeffrey Walton wrote: > > I'm trying to build Make 4.2.1 from the release tarball on an antique > system. I've tried configuring with without a guile option, > --without-guile and --disable-guile. In each case the tail of > configure results in: > > checking for wor

How to disable Guile?

Hi Everyone, I'm trying to build Make 4.2.1 from the release tarball on an antique system. I've tried configuring with without a guile option, --without-guile and --disable-guile. In each case the tail of configure results in: checking for working strcoll... yes checking for working alloca.h... y

[bug #56422] How to find the number of rules in GMAKE

Update of bug #56422 (project make): Status:None => Not A Bug Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Make doesn't know how

[bug #56422] How to find the number of rules in GMAKE

URL: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?56422> Summary: How to find the number of rules in GMAKE Project: make Submitted by: None Submitted on: Fri 31 May 2019 03:03:24 AM UTC Severity: 3 - Normal Item

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

> If the makefile, or any of the files it includes, is updated by make > then make will re-execute itself and re-read all the makefiles from > scratch so it can see the updated content. When that happens, > obviously all the $(info ...) functions etc. will be re-expanded. Thanks for your repeated

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 15:56 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > As always, if you can't figure out what's going on running "make > > -d" will help you more than we can. > > I wonder about the information “Re-executing[1]: make --no-builtin- > rules -d” there. > Unfortunately, I do not recognise so

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

> Your Makefile looks likely to rebuild .depend, a file that it includes. > So, like Paul said: >>> or else make has re-executed itself >>> because this makefile or one of its >>> included files was rebuilt; Yes. - This can happen at the moment. > I wonder about the information “Re-executing[1]

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

Your Makefile looks likely to rebuild .depend, a file that it includes. So, like Paul said: >> or else make has re-executed itself >> because this makefile or one of its >> included files was rebuilt; see https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gnu.org%2Fsoftware%2Fm

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

> If you are seeing these values printed multiple times it means that the > makefile is being parsed multiple times. How can such additional parsing be clarified further? Will it help to display extra data from special make variables? > Why that might be, we can't determine from the information

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

On Thu, 2017-06-22 at 09:36 +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > modules_without_mli::=$(filter-out $(basename $(mli_sources)),$(basename > > $(ml_sources))) > > $(info modules_without_mli) > > $(info $(sort $(modules_without_mli))) > > Now I observe that the test output occurs twice while I am tr

Re: How to avoid the double execution of a make info call?

> modules_without_mli::=$(filter-out $(basename $(mli_sources)),$(basename > $(ml_sources))) > $(info modules_without_mli) > $(info $(sort $(modules_without_mli))) It seems that I got this design approach working to some degree by the addition of a few calls of make functions. I am not completely

[bug #47624] Suppress unnecessary warning for "include XXX" when we know how to build XXX

Update of bug #47624 (project make): Status:None => Duplicate Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #3: I've fixed bug #102 in

[bug #47624] Suppress unnecessary warning for "include XXX" when we know how to build XXX

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #47624 (project make): I would suggest one small change: instead of making the message go away entirely, change it to reflect the full situation: a) No such file or directory, no path to rebuild. Stopping. b) No such file or directory, rebuilding from target (...) c) Ru

[bug #47624] Suppress unnecessary warning for "include XXX" when we know how to build XXX

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #47624 (project make): I like this change because we have also seen much confusion resulting from this message-which-looks-like-an-error-message-but-isn't. Also want to point out an alternative: Makefile.test:11: generated_include1: No such file or directory (remaking)

[bug #47624] Suppress unnecessary warning for "include XXX" when we know how to build XXX

URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?47624> Summary: Suppress unnecessary warning for "include XXX" when we know how to build XXX Project: make Submitted by: stefanb Submitted on: Tue 05 Apr 2016 08:18:01 AM GMT

[bug #45211] Add option to MAKEFLAGS (How to set RM variable?)

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #45211 (project make): The claim being, I presume, that the second RM='' should either be RM='rm -f' or RM='rm', the latter only being the case if changing MAKEFLAGS takes effect implausibly quickly. It's the former with a Debian Wheezy make 3.81 (origin says "default"),

[bug #45211] Add option to MAKEFLAGS (How to set RM variable?)

URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?45211> Summary: Add option to MAKEFLAGS (How to set RM variable?) Project: make Submitted by: None Submitted on: Птн 29 Май 2015 10:51:16 Severity: 3 - Normal Item

Fwd: How to get make result

Hi, Use the -n option. make -n This shows what would happen but doesn't do anything.  It's not precisely what you want but it's the closest thing. Regards, Tim On 1 May 2012 10:46, ?? wrote: > Hello, my english not vell. > I try to explain my tack. > I need go get file names

How to get make result

Hello, my english not vell. I try to explain my tack. I need go get file names what would be compiled after make will be run. How can i get them as an out put of make working. ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listin

Re: mention how to get the other half of $*

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:30 AM, wrote: > (info "(make) Automatic Variables") says > `$*' >     The stem with which an implicit rule matches > > OK, that is the stem. Now mention what can we use to get the other half. > OK, the answer apparently is here. Please mention it. > %.xcf %.jpeg:%.pdf; g

mention how to get the other half of $*

(info "(make) Automatic Variables") says `$*' The stem with which an implicit rule matches OK, that is the stem. Now mention what can we use to get the other half. OK, the answer apparently is here. Please mention it. %.xcf %.jpeg:%.pdf; gs -sDEVICE=$(subst .,,$(suffix $@)) -sOutputFile=$@ -

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 07:24:50PM -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 07:12:53PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote: > ... > >> Makefile:442: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Stop. > >> > >> config %config: scr

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

ld make assume that building "bar.a" will also build "bar.b" > *and* "foo"? > How about this rule: > foo blip %.a %.b: > ${commands} > Will building "bar.a" also build "bar.b", "foo", and "blip"? >

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

%.a %.b: ${commands} should make assume that building "bar.a" will also build "bar.b" *and* "foo"? How about this rule: foo blip %.a %.b: ${commands} Will building "bar.a" also build "bar.b", "foo", and "

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

x include/config > $(Q)$(MAKE) $(build)=scripts/kconfig $@ Here I try to catch the following: make config make menuconfig make xconfig make foobarconfig I must admit I cannot see the problem with mixing implicit and normal rules in the above. But I gues this is my simple use of it.

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > Correct, although IMO just because it has a _possible_ reasonable > interpretation isn't enough to overcome all the reasons why we shouldn't > allow it :-) I agree. I just thought of another reason to dislike it: %.a %

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 15:32 -0700, Philip Guenther wrote: > Just to be clear, the problem with mixing a pattern with a normal > target is what happens when there's a pattern prerequisite, right? I > mean, the example you gave at least has a sensical _possible_ > interpretation, but this: >foo

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 23:15 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Can you give me a more precise pointer where we have this issue > so I can get it fixed. I guess it is Makefile.build... If you mean in the Linux kernel there are two places: Makefile:1601: *** mixed implicit and normal rules. Sto

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > Here's the issue: if you write a rule like this: > >foo %.c: ; @: oops > > it actually works! This, I believe, should be illegal. Just to be clear, the problem with mixing a pattern with a normal target is what h

Re: Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 05:48:11PM -0400, Paul Smith wrote: > Hi all; > > While working on some changes to 2nd expansion etc. to try to reduce > total heap usage in GNU make, I've discovered that there is a bug in the > current makefile parsing. My new version doesn't have this bug (or, > more pr

Bug in pattern rule parsing: how to handle?

Hi all; While working on some changes to 2nd expansion etc. to try to reduce total heap usage in GNU make, I've discovered that there is a bug in the current makefile parsing. My new version doesn't have this bug (or, more precisely, it contains the opposite bug) and I've noticed at least two dif

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) inmakefile

PROTECTED]>: > Try make -f and.mk A=22 B=44. > > > -- > > *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: > bug-make-bounces+mdorey [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Tim Murphy > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 17, 2008 09:31 > *To:* bug-make@gnu.org > *Su

RE: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) inmakefile

Try make -f and.mk A=22 B=44. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Murphy Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 09:31 To: bug-make@gnu.org Subject: Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) inmakefile Hi, I have ame

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile

Hi, I have amended an example of how to use $(and) that I posted earlier for Rakesh. I have tested this on Linux with make 3.81. It shows a crude way and a slightly more sophisticated way to use $(and) in an if statement to determine if two variables have equal values: A=2 > B=4 >

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile

lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, June 6, 2008, 3:40 PM Hi, # do "equal" by seeing if a subst returns the empty string: A_is_2:=$(if $(subst 2,,$(A)),,T) B_is_4:=$(if $(subst 4,,$(B)),

Fwd: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile

Sorry, forgot to send this to bug-make as well. -- Forwarded message -- From: Tim Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 2008/6/6 Subject: Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefile To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi, # do "equal" by seeing if

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefiles

wrote: From: Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefiles To: "rakesh aggarwal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: bug-make@gnu.org Date: Thursday, June 5, 2008, 11:28 PM On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 05:36:56AM -0

Re: Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefiles

On Thu, Jun 05, 2008 at 05:36:56AM -0700, rakesh aggarwal wrote: > Hi, > > I read the GNU make manual and found there are $(or condition ) and $(and > condition ) functions. ( at > http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html#Conditional-Functions ) > But i didnt get in which format i have

Help : how to use $(or condition ) & $(and condition ) in makefiles

Hi, I read the GNU make manual and found there are $(or condition ) and $(and condition ) functions. ( at http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html#Conditional-Functions ) But i didnt get in which format i have to put conditions in these functions. Please help me by give detail of condit

tell them how to break assignments long lines

Your Make Info document does not tell the user how to break his variable assignments without tears. So mention it explicitly right upon the relevant page. $ make this is long line 1 that I would li ke to break this is long line 2 that I would like to break $ cat makefile A=this is long line 1

Re: mention how to quote a comma in "call"

OK, but near >> reverse = $(2) $(1) do add a forward reference to SR>Commas and unmatched parentheses or braces cannot appear in the text because the latter section is so far away. ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mail

Re: mention how to quote a comma in "call"

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 05:25:50AM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Your > reverse = $(2) $(1) > example in the manual is great, however if one day your users happen > to want to quote a comma, > OK:;echo $(call reverse,a,b) > SORRY1:;echo $(call reverse,a\,b,c) > SORRY2:;echo $(call reverse,"a,

mention how to quote a comma in "call"

Your reverse = $(2) $(1) example in the manual is great, however if one day your users happen to want to quote a comma, OK:;echo $(call reverse,a,b) SORRY1:;echo $(call reverse,a\,b,c) SORRY2:;echo $(call reverse,"a,b",c) then they are S.O.L. unless you mention how. One apparently needs to do EE

Re: How to add comma to a list?

Put it into a variable: , = , $(patsubst %,-Wl$,-y,%_,$(FOO)) If that's too tricky, just use a variable like COMMA or something :-). All GNU make functions parse up the arguments to the function BEFORE any evaluation of the arguments happens. -- --

Re: How to add comma to a list?

On 12 Jul 2005 at 10:14 UTC-0700, Ted Stern wrote: > Hi all, > > What is the proper way to insert commas into each word of a GNU Make > variable? > > I want to change FOO something like this: > > FOO := a b c d e > FOO := $(patsubst %,-Wl,-y,%_,$(FOO)) > > to get > > -Wl,-y,a_ -Wl,-y

Re: How to add comma to a list?

On 7/12/05, Ted Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > What is the proper way to insert commas into each word of a GNU Make > variable? > > I want to change FOO something like this: > > FOO := a b c d e > FOO := $(patsubst %,-Wl,-y,%_,$(FOO)) > > to get > > -Wl,-y,a_ -Wl

Re: How to add comma to a list?

Ted Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi all, Your post belongs to help-make, not bug-make. > > What is the proper way to insert commas into each word of a GNU Make > variable? > > I want to change FOO something like this: > > FOO := a b c d e > FOO := $(patsubst %,-Wl,-y,%_,$(FOO))

How to add comma to a list?

Hi all, What is the proper way to insert commas into each word of a GNU Make variable? I want to change FOO something like this: FOO := a b c d e FOO := $(patsubst %,-Wl,-y,%_,$(FOO)) to get -Wl,-y,a_ -Wl,-y,b_ -Wl,-y,c_ -Wl,-y,d_ -Wl,-y,e_ Somehow I need to comment the comma s

Re: How to install gmake and pkg-config?

%% "nlsde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: n> bug-make, I encountered a problem when I was trying to compile a n> gtk programm on HPUX 11.0. I don't understand why you're asking here. You were able to build and install GNU make properly (with a configure --prefix=/opt/gtk, GNU make will install

How to install gmake and pkg-config?

It seemed that I have failed to install the pkg-config, also I can't not find any GNU make or gmake in my computer. What should I do next? IF I HAVE BEEN USING A WRONG WAY TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM, PLEASE TELL ME HOW TO CORRECTLY RUN A GTK PROGRAMM O

Re: say how to change PATH

%% Dan Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: dj> In Info, one cannot find how to change PATH in a Makefile. dj> PATH=/usr/sbin:$(PATH) won't do without spelling out PATH. dj> The best one can do is once on each line: dj> P=PATH=/usr/sbin:$$PATH dj> a:

say how to change PATH

In Info, one cannot find how to change PATH in a Makefile. PATH=/usr/sbin:$(PATH) won't do without spelling out PATH. The best one can do is once on each line: P=PATH=/usr/sbin:$$PATH a: $P; which faubackup ___ Bug-make mailing list [

How to turn your pocket change into REAL MONEY...

Title: Pocket Change     To be removed from our active database click here.

RE: How-to

%% "Howard Chu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: hc> You just answered your own question: "b" & "c" depend on "a", so make "a" hc> a dependency for "b" & "c": Right, what Howard said; I got it backwards in my message :(. -- ---

RE: How-to

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > John Alvord > > I've been working to rework some makefiles to they work correctly > under parallel execution conditions. > > all: a b c > > a: > > b: > > c: > > Lets say "a" is a rule which creates some

Re: How-to

%% [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Alvord) writes: ja> I've been working to rework some makefiles to they work correctly ja> under parallel execution conditions. ja> all: a b c ja> a: ja> b: ja> c: ja> Lets say "a" is a rule which creates some directories which are used ja> by "b" an

How-to

I've been working to rework some makefiles to they work correctly under parallel execution conditions. all: a b c a: b: c: Lets say "a" is a rule which creates some directories which are used by "b" and "c". How can I make sure that "b" and "c" are postponed until "a" completes? john alvord

Re: Question/how-to

%% Duane Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: de> [~> make -v de> GNU Make version 3.77, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath. de> Under SunOS 4 make, we can do this: de> foo.lst + foo.o: foo.s de> my_assembler -l foo.lst -o foo.o foo.s de> Key point is: "target *PLUS* target" Thi

Question/how-to

This is not a bug, but a question about a feature. I don't know where else to post this. [~> make -v GNU Make version 3.77, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath. Under SunOS 4 make, we can do this: foo.lst + foo.o: foo.s my_assembler -l foo.lst -o foo.o foo.s Key point is: "target *