Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/05/07/08:19:09
My point was that it was the __DJGPP__ (Change 1) which was left out of the
original code that made the difference. The original "Change 2" line ("...mtime
-1 > now...") worked sometimes to "handle" (whether rightly or wrongly) the
warning when Change 1 was added. Both of the other "Change 2-s" ("...mtime-3 >
now..." and "mtime > now + 3") handled the warning always (whether rightly or
wrongly).
Rob Finley
-----Original Message-----
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 1998 6:48 AM
To: ROBERT FINLEY
Cc: nate AT cartsys DOT com; djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: RE: Make "Clock Skew" problem.
On Mon, 4 May 1998 ROBERT_FINLEY AT ntsc DOT navy DOT mil wrote:
> It turns out the Change 1 shuts-up make and Change 2 has no impact.
This is a wrong conclusion. Change 1 *includes* Change 2, so it is
better to use Change 2 alone (it's simpler).
There was no need to test the original ifdef, since DJGPP doesn't
define WINDOWS32, so unless you add __DJGPP__ or __MSDOS__, that code
won't be compiled into the DJGPP program.
> Now, weather or not the messenger has been shot or the problem is
> fixed, I don't know.
The problem is NOT fixed, you just told Make to ignore it. IMHO,
leaving the warning is a better way, since then at least you know
something might be wrong and can look closer. If make is shut up, you
are just oblivious to potential problems.
- Raw text -