From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Nov 11 23:15:15 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA05962
          for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 23:15:15 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from detlev.UUCP (79.camalott.com [208.203.140.79])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA05957
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 11 Nov 1998 23:15:12 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from joelh@gnu.org)
Received: (from joelh@localhost)
	by detlev.UUCP (8.9.1/8.9.1) id BAA18575;
	Thu, 12 Nov 1998 01:04:06 -0600 (CST)
	(envelope-from joelh)
To: David Holland <dholland@cs.toronto.edu>
Cc: kline@tao.thought.org (Gary Kline), hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: bsd make to gnu make conversion, anyone??
References: <98Nov11.234727edt.37814-2936@qew.cs.toronto.edu>
From: Joel Ray Holveck <joelh@gnu.org>
Date: 12 Nov 1998 01:04:05 -0600
In-Reply-To: David Holland's message of "Wed, 11 Nov 1998 23:47:27 -0500"
Message-ID: <86hfw5ie8q.fsf@detlev.UUCP>
Lines: 60
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>>> Are there any makefile senior Wizards out there who can clue me
>>> in on the translation of this pmake 
> gmake doesn't have an equivalent for .for, so you're stuck with making
> a mess.

Using gmake's 'foreach' and sh's 'for' may be useful.

>> for lang in ${LANGS}
>> ${lang}.mv.cat: ${.CURDIR}/nls/${lang}/mv.msg
>>         gencat -new ${.TARGET} ${.ALLSRC}
>> .endfor
> %.mv.cat: ${.CURDIR}/nls/%/mv.msg
> 	gencat -new $@ $^

This is the cleanest solution.  Still, if you want alternatives, I
haven't tried this, but foreach may work here, as a generalization of
for:

define do-lang
$(lang).mv.cat: $(.CURDIR)/nls/$(lang)/mv.msg
	gencat -new $(.TARGET) $(.ALLSRC)
endef
$(foreach lang,$(LANGS),$(do-lang))

and similarly for the other one.  Note that lang either should not
have been defined yet, or defined with =, not :=.

Again, I personally think that your % rule is by far cleaner.

>> beforeinstall:
>> .for lang in ${LANGS}
>>         ${INSTALL} ${COPY} -o ${BINOWN} -g ${BINGRP} -m ${NOBINMODE} \
>>                 ${lang}.mv.cat ${DESTDIR}${NLSDIR}/${lang}/mv.cat
>> .endfor
> ${patsubst %, install-%, ${LANGS}}: install-%:
> 	${INSTALL} -c -o root -m 644 ${patsubst install-%, %.mv.cat, $@} \
> 		${DESTDIR}${NLSDIR}/${patsubst install-%, %, $@}/mv.cat
>
> beforeinstall: ${patsubst %, install-%, ${LANGS}}

What's wrong with using sh like God intended?

beforeinstall:
	for lang in ${LANGS} ; do \
		${INSTALL} ${COPY} -o ${BINOWN} -g ${BINGRP} -m ${NOBINMODE} \
		$${lang}.mv.cat ${DESTDIR}${NLSDIR}/$${lang}/mv.cat ;        \
	done

Note the $${lang}, so that sh interprets the variable instead of make.

(Using foreach may also work here.)

Happy hacking,
joelh

-- 
Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org
   Fourth law of programming:
   Anything that can go wrong wi
sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message