Re: Adding line numbers to output for "No rule to make target"

[Jonny Grant]

On 27/11/15 17:58, address@hidden wrote:
> Jonny Grant writes:
>   > >   If you do it that way, now you've got two different formats for the
>   > >   same message.  This can be confusing to users, and certainly
>   > >   complicates factors if there is software sitting on top of Make and
>   > >   operating on the messages (continuous integration / automatic failure
>   > >   triage).
>   >
>   > CI uses program return codes in my experience.
>   > EXIT_SUCCESS is 0
>
>   On failure, CI may operate on the output text to determine the locus
>   of the actual failure, and automatically file defects.

Sounds reasonable. I've not myself worked with such a CI or environment.

>   > >   Consider the following other special cases:
>   > >
>   > >     o Gnu Make has $(eval), and it's possible to generate rules that
>   > >       don't correspond to actual Makefile lines.
>   >
>   > I thought the message only related to targets.
>   > Do you mean if targets are generated by $(eval) ?
>
>   Yes.

Ok, I expect the line number wouldn't have been set. Or it might have 
been set to the $(eval) line that created the target - which would help 
the user debugging the makefile issue :)

>   > >     o What if there are multiple targets that refer to 'test.o'?
>   > >       Should all be reported, or just the one that failed?
>   >
>   > Often compilation only reports the first occurrence of the error. Make
>   > could behave in a similar way. A more advanced solution would
>   > report more.
>
>   Sure, it's software; it could do lots of things.  The point I'm
>   trying to get across is that requesting a feature in a mature product
>   means that many scenarios must be explored, including not breaking
>   existing uses.

Perhaps could add a test case for the particular compatible behaviour. 
As far as I am aware, Make errors start: "make: ***"   and end "Stop". A 
test could be created for such lines.

I don't recall when Make started outputting line numbers for makefiles, 
I imagine that impacted existing users. However the benefit dramatically 
outweighed any updates necessitated.


If there is support for the change, I can file a bug now we have discussed?
Regards, Jonny