From: Petr Ovtchenkov <ptr@void-ptr.info>
To: Paul Smith <psmith@gnu.org>, bug-gnulib@gnu.org
Cc: Bruno Haible <bruno@clisp.org>, bug-gettext@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 09:29:06 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200402092906.39d74aa9@void-ptr.info> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7b88a7c4d6ee6e521f9f82809e389a2730080f8.camel@gnu.org>
On Wed, 01 Apr 2020 21:00:15 -0400
Paul Smith <psmith@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > But % pattern rules are GNU make specific syntax, since this syntax
> > is not specified by POSIX [1]. I fear that I'll have to use a more
> > complicated fix...
>
> Correct, you cannot use pattern rules in portable makefiles.
Well, BSD make prefer % notaion too. What is example of POSIX make,
that not understand % rules?
> The only problematic rule is this one:
>
> .po.gmo: $(srcdir)/$(DOMAIN).pot
>
> The other changes are not necessary.
Agree. With note: both main make families (GNU and BSD) mention
.a.b notaion as 'old' [2], and prefer %b: %a [2,3], and ... what
is non-BSD, non-GNU POSIX make we keep in mind? That used by Sun
Microsytems, before preference for GNU Make? This was more then 20
years ago.
The .a.b notation instigate ill-formed ".a.b: d" construction,
so I would prefer to avoid it outside of "standard implicit rules".
> ...
>>
> In short, in no version of GNU make did the suffix rule defined here
> ever actually do what was desired and there will be no loss of
> functionality by simply removing the extra prerequisite completely:
>
> .po.gmo:
> @lang=`echo $* | sed -e 's,.*/,,'`; \
> ...
Dependency from .pot file is a scope of gettext authors, I think.
WBR,
--
- ptr
[2]
https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Suffix-Rules.html#Suffix-Rules
[3]
https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=make&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=SunOS+5.9&format=html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-02 6:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-01 13:12 [PATCH 0/1] old-fashioned suffix rules cannot have any prerequisites Petr Ovtchenkov
2020-04-01 13:12 ` [PATCH 1/1] " Petr Ovtchenkov
2020-04-02 0:01 ` [PATCH 0/1] " Bruno Haible
2020-04-02 1:00 ` Paul Smith
2020-04-02 6:29 ` Petr Ovtchenkov [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-04-01 12:26 Petr Ovtchenkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200402092906.39d74aa9@void-ptr.info \
--to=ptr@void-ptr.info \
--cc=bruno@clisp.org \
--cc=bug-gettext@gnu.org \
--cc=bug-gnulib@gnu.org \
--cc=psmith@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).