Re: Static Rules Unceremoniously Dropped

2006-01-31 Thread William Ahern
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 14:14 -0800, William Ahern wrote: Using 3.81beta3, it seems that one of our pattern rules CFLAGS_$(d) := -DFOO $(d)/%.o: $(d)/%.c -lfoo -lbar $(CC) $(CFLAGS_$(@D)) ... Oops. Misprint. I meant Pattern Rules Unceremoniously Dropped.

RE: Static Rules Unceremoniously Dropped

2006-01-31 Thread Martin Dorey
-make@gnu.org Subject: Re: Static Rules Unceremoniously Dropped %% William Ahern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: wa Using 3.81beta3, it seems that one of our pattern rules wa CFLAGS_$(d) := -DFOO wa $(d)/%.o: $(d)/%.c -lfoo -lbar wa $(CC) $(CFLAGS_$(@D)) ... wa is dropped without

RE: Static Rules Unceremoniously Dropped

2006-01-31 Thread William Ahern
On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 14:44 -0800, Martin Dorey wrote: ( As documented in info make, 10.5.1: `%' in a prerequisite of a pattern rule stands for the same stem that was matched by the `%' in the target. In order for the pattern rule to apply, its target pattern must match the file name