Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 22:26:46 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> To: peter@bonkers.taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Cc: nate@trout.sri.MT.net, jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, hackers@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: Any objection to adding a .undef(VARNAME) to make? Message-ID: <199504220526.WAA00958@gndrsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199504220339.WAA06361@bonkers.taronga.com> from "Peter da Silva" at Apr 21, 95 10:39:20 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > FOO= 1 > > > FOO= undefined > > How about just: > > FOO= > > make an empty definition undefined. Undefineds are treated as empty in make > anyway. It would also match the way .SUFFIXES: works. That is in ``make'', read the psd:12 manual for the difference between undefined and variables that are empty, it is different in pmake. I have not verified that our make truely follows the pmake manual in this regard, but I do seem to recall having some trouble in this area. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Custom computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504220526.WAA00958>