Message-Id:	<199605210914.FAA18536@delorie.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 May 96 12:05:52 LIT
From:	Martynas Kunigelis <martynas DOT kunigelis AT VM DOT KTU DOT LT>
Subject:	Re: 'make' problem
To:	j DOT aldrich6 AT genie DOT com, DJGPP mailing list <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	Your message of Tue, 21 May 96 02:45:00 UTC 0000

On Tue, 21 May 96 02:45:00 UTC 0000 you said:
>
>I think you simply need to put this line in the makefile:
>
>.SUFFIXES: .cpp
>
>will
>take a rule like:
>
>.cpp.o :
>
>as indicating a target of ".cpp.o", instead of the intended expansion.
>
  Yes. This worked. FSF should be notified to include .cpp in make.

>BTW, if you read up in the make docs, you will see that that form of
>declaring an implicit rule is obsolete.  You'd get much more reliable
>results from make, and avoid having to alter .SUFFIXES, by using:
>
>%.o : %.cpp
>
  Yup, I knew bout that, but I thought this was not standard. Do other makes
  support this? I thought that was a GNU-Make-only feature. Tell me if it's
  not.


  BTW, I found a problem with djgpp 2.0 and Borland make. gcc dies with a
  floating point exceptions when invoked from Borland make. I'm not quite
  sure now, but I think it WORKED with Beta 3. Has this something to do with
  the fact that Borland make is a 16 bit DPMI program? But why the FPE then?
  Maybe this could be a DJGPP bug?

Martynas

- Raw text -