Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:29:33 -0400 From: "John D. Hendrickson" <johnandsara2@cox.net> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: make -n -n Message-ID: <5622695D.6040700@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <561F3406.9050906@FreeBSD.org> References: <561F3406.9050906@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Does anyone consider 'make -n -n' a thing for top-level builds?
>
> We have this ${_+_} thing in Makefiles that used to expand to '+' if you
> gave '-n -n'. This was so just 1 '-n' would just show what the
> top-level Makefile would do:
>
> ~/svn/clean2 # make -n includes
> cd /root/svn/clean2; PATH=/sbin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin make -m
> /root/svn/clean2/share/mk -f Makefile.inc1 TARGET=amd64
> TARGET_ARCH=amd64 includes
>
> Versus the more expected (at least for bmake) -n behavior of traversing
> sub-makes:
>
> ~/svn/clean2 # make -n -n includes
> ===> lib (includes)
> ===> lib/csu (includes)
> ===> lib/csu/amd64 (includes)
> ===> lib/libcompiler_rt (includes)
> ===> lib/libc (includes)
> ===> lib/libc/tests (includes)
> ===> lib/libc/tests/tls_dso (includes)
> ===> lib/libc/tests/c063 (includes)
> etc...
>
> Note the actual output may be off due to local changes, but the point is
> that -n with bmake is documented to run sub-makes with -n as well, so it
> calls right down the chain showing all build commands without taking any
> real actions.
>
> Bmake added a '-N' flag that essentially does the hack that we've put
> into our top-level Makefile - it doesn't run sub-makes.
>
>
> So having said all of that, the ${_+_} never expands anymore since
> r251748 (June 2013). The act of it working in top-level has only been
> fixed since r288391 (September 2015).
>
> Given it was broken for this long period I assume no one uses '-n -n' or
> even knew about it.
>
> I would like to remove it (-n -n and _+_) and just use the (bmake)
> documented -n and -N flags and use '+' everywhere appropriate. Note that
> we use .MAKE in some targets that achieves largely the same thing, but
> many sub-make calls don't have a .MAKE and lack a proper '+' to recurse
> in Makefile.inc1.
>
if you take a Makefile for older pmake and run it with newer - there is
no telling what might happen (unless of course it's already been tried)
no telling
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5622695D.6040700>