[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GNU make troubleshooting
From: |
Paul Smith |
Subject: |
Re: GNU make troubleshooting |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Jul 2023 15:29:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.48.3 (by Flathub.org) |
On Mon, 2023-07-10 at 21:18 +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Paul Smith wrote:
> > It's not acceptable (to me) to only show the one newest file, not
> > all files that are newer than the target, because often you want to
> > know all the newer files.
>
> You say "It's not acceptable (to me) to only show the one newest
> file", and I say "A tool that shows me 3.7 KB worth of file names in
> one line is useless to me, because that is information overload, and
> I don't have good filtering skills".
I think your problems with the output were addressed in GNU Make 4.4.
Anyway I don't see that.
I honestly don't see any point in just printing the "newest"
prerequisite. If the rule was invoked in the first place then you
already know that _some_ file was newer. What's the added benefit of
knowing the name of only one, essentially random, prerequisite?
- GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Paul Smith, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Paul Smith, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Paul Smith, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Bruno Haible, 2023/07/10
- Re: GNU make troubleshooting,
Paul Smith <=
Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Paul Smith, 2023/07/10
Re: GNU make troubleshooting, Jeffrey Walton, 2023/07/10