Re: Rules with multiple outputs

[Paul Smith]

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:19 -0500, Lane Schwartz wrote:
> If you happen to know where to find the previous discussions with
> regard to this idea, especially previously proposed syntax, that would
> be great. If not, I can take a look through the archives.

BTW, the very first thing you should do is subscribe yourself to the
mailing lists so that we don't have to keep approving your posts :-)

There have been a few recently on this mailing list and/or
address@hidden discussing using "+" as a separator, etc.  I don't have
those threads offhand.  The one I do know about that was the last
decision we made on this topic is here (be sure to read the entire
thread, even going to the next month, because syntax changed a bit):

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/make-alpha/2002-12/msg00000.html