Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:06:15 +0300 (MSK) From: "Alexander V. Lukyanov" Message-Id: <199603191606.TAA06117@video.yars.free.net> To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: ./prog - bad command ? > On Mon, 18 Mar 1996, Alexander V. Lukyanov wrote: > > > If I write in makefile ./program to start just compiled program, > > I receive message 'Bad command or file name' from command.com. > > Can you post the relevant part of Makefile? Make does call COMMAND.COM in > certain cases (like when the command line you define in the rule uses > redirection), but it's impossible to say for sure without seeing the > actual rule which your Makefile invokes. Yes, I use redirection in that line. > > Isn't it a bug in the make port? I supposed that make should use > > system() to execute commands, and system() starts my program fine > > without command.com. > > `system' from the v2.0 library handles redirection itself, but Make > currently doesn't call `system' when it sees a redirection symbol. This > isn't as easy to correct as it might seem. For instance, the current > version of `system' doesn't support long command lines, (without which > redirection support isn't worth much), and DJGPP Make *must* support long > command lines, or you won't be able to compile all the GNU packages. > > (Btw, I'm working on enhancing `system' to do all of the above and then > some, with the explicit goal to use these features in a port of GNU > Make. So if you have other complains about the current port of Make, > drop me a note.) I suppose it is easier for me just to remove './' :-) I just wanted to make a makefile compatible with Unix... Without ./ it will work if PATH includes current directory.