GNU bug report logs - #13349
Could we just assume support for make recursive variable expansion unconditionally?

Previous Next

Full log

Message #43 received at 13349 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Nick Bowler <nbowler <at> elliptictech.com>
Cc: 13349 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, "bug-autoconf <at> gnu.org" <bug-autoconf <at> gnu.org>,
	Eric Blake <eblake <at> redhat.com>,
	"automake-ng <at> gnu.org" <automake-ng <at> gnu.org>,
	Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen <at> simple.dallas.tx.us>
Subject: Re: bug#13349: Re-execute with the "correct" make implementation
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 00:03:27 +0100

On 01/03/2013 11:53 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> On 2013-01-03 23:05 +0100, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>
>>   TARGETS = all check clean distclean dist distcheck install uninstall
>>   .PHONY: $(TARGETS)
>>   $(TARGETS): ; @gmake $(AM_MAKEFLAGS) $@
> 
> Unfortunately, this kind of wrapper doesn't work particularly well.  If
> the user runs something similar to:
> 
>   make -j2 all install
> 
> then the wrapper makefile will happily fork off two independent make
> instances in parallel: one running "gmake all" and one running "gmake
> install".  The result will probably be catastrophic.
>
Sigh, so very true.  Adding ".NOTPARALLEL:" could fix this issue though.
Assuming that it is portable enough ...

At any case, the wrapper would be just a convenience for the most
common cases, like:

  ./configure && make -j4 check && make install

It doesn't have to work in all (or even most) scenarios.

Regards,
  Stefano

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.