On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I could not reproduce this.
> If I do b/* it will be executed once for b.
> Anyway, if you are sure the modification works, it is great.
> I just don't understand why it defer.
Without the patch I can easily reproduce the pr
I could not reproduce this.
If I do b/* it will be executed once for b.
Anyway, if you are sure the modification works, it is great.
I just don't understand why it defer.
Thanks,
Alon.
On 10/9/08, Ludovic Rousseau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <[EMAIL P
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Alon Bar-Lev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was not aware of any problem, can you please provide some sample?
> I worked very hard to make it work with automake generation of rules.
The problem, if I understand correctly, is that you have have
something like (after
I was not aware of any problem, can you please provide some sample?
I worked very hard to make it work with automake generation of rules.
Alon.
On 10/9/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Revision: 3580
> Author: ludovic.rousseau
> Date: 2008-10-09 11:02:42 +0200 (Thu, 09 O
