From:	Jerzy Klejnowski <dziabol AT polbox DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Make, suffix rules and pattern rules.
Date:	Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:24:16 +0100
Organization:	samotnik w swoim zamku
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<3A04A8B0.2D334BD9@polbox.com>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1001101102948 DOT 7517K-100000 AT is>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	pc101.wroclaw.ppp.tpnet.pl
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	news.tpi.pl 973380257 6870 212.160.40.101 (4 Nov 2000 23:24:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	usenet AT tpi DOT pl
NNTP-Posting-Date:	4 Nov 2000 23:24:17 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.07 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686)
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I cannot reproduce this: all of the above variants work for me, using
> what you call ``my rule''.  Perhaps you omitted something from this
> Makefile snippet, and that omitted part is responsible for the
> problem.

The difference arises from the fact, that there was no header file in
current directory (when I met this problem my makefile was in some
sort of "intermediate state": there were no headers as prerequisites
earlier, and I wanted to add them).

However, I don't understand why `make' chooses another rule for building
target depending on existence of some prerequisites. Shouldn't it try to
build files it cannot find instead?

- Raw text -