[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?
From: |
nusret |
Subject: |
Re: bug in the documentation, or ...? |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:35:53 -0800 (PST) |
[Paul, the first email sent to your private email, but
it was an accident. I apologize for that]
Alright, but a last question:
I really don't have any experience with Unix(-like)
systems. Someone told in some mailing list that if we
change ';' to '&&' the change will cause problems in
some unix systems. is this true? Why do you say && is
safer?
Thank you and regards,
Nusret
--- "Paul D. Smith" <address@hidden> wrote:
> %% nusret <address@hidden> writes:
>
> n> I quote from the make manual (3.80)
>
> n> foo : bar/lose
> n> cd bar; gobble lose > ../foo
> n> ...
> n> '''''''''
>
> n> This doesn't work on Windows XP cmd.exe. Does
> make
> n> preprocess commands to replace ; with && which
> works?
> n> Or should the manual point to this?
> n> (I learned it the hard way :)
>
> In general the examples in the GNU make manual
> assume that SHELL is a
> POSIX-compatible shell, in a POSIX environment. A
> disclaimer to that
> effect is probably something that should be made in
> the manual, but I
> don't really want to write two versions of all the
> examples, one for
> POSIX and one for Windows... Windows users are
> expected to understand
> the idiosyncracies of their own environment using
> CMD.EXE (just as
> anyone would need to understand the ramifications of
> changing SHELL to
> Perl or some other interpreter).
>
>
> _However_! That example has already been changed in
> the manual, because
> it's safer to use "&&" anyway. The new version of
> that example is:
>
> foo : bar/lose
> cd $(@D) && gobble $(@F) > ../$@
>
> --
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Paul D. Smith <address@hidden> Find some
> GNU make tips at:
> http://www.gnu.org
> http://make.paulandlesley.org
> "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a
> professional." --Mad Scientist
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
- bug in the documentation, or ...?, nusret, 2006/02/14
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, Paul D. Smith, 2006/02/14
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?,
nusret <=
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/02/14
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, nusret, 2006/02/14
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/02/15
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, nusret, 2006/02/15
- Re: bug in the documentation, or ...?, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/02/15