From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Feb 26 11:57:59 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA29209 for ports-outgoing; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:57:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA29202 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:57:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from veda.is (ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with ESMTP id LAA14799 for ; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 11:57:54 -0800 (PST) Received: (from adam@localhost) by veda.is (8.8.4/8.7.3) id UAA00718; Wed, 26 Feb 1997 20:08:44 GMT From: Adam David Message-Id: <199702262008.UAA00718@veda.is> Subject: Re: make -k oddities In-Reply-To: from Warner Losh at "Feb 26, 97 11:37:53 am" To: imp@village.org (Warner Losh) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 20:08:43 +0000 (GMT) Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ports@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > : make -k means "ignore error return from command" but bsd.port.mk uses the > : error return to bail out at that point. > > Not quiet. make -i means "ignore error return from command" but -k > means this with the restriction that nothing that depends on those > things returning an error should be built. No fetch should imply no > build, but doesn't. We don't have FETCH_COOKIE, and if we did the dependency would cause make -k to skip the build as expected. There must have been a good reason not to implement FETCH_COOKIE? -- Adam David