[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period)
From: |
Aaron Shatters |
Subject: |
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period) |
Date: |
Mon, 23 Apr 2007 07:20:53 -0700 (PDT) |
>> Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Aaron Shatters <address@hidden>
>>
>> As I noted previously, there are many workarounds to this problem. I am
>> interested in fixing the root cause. After all of this investigation, do we
>> have consensus that this is a limitation of make? More importantly, do we
>> have consensus that it should be >fixed? We seem to have run out of reasons
>> for not fixing this problem.
>
>No, I don't agree that this is a limitation of Make. Make just
>invokes the shell built-in, and the shell built-in behaves like it
>does from the command line.
>
>I remain unconvinced that we should ``fix'' this just because this
>fundamental incompatibility between shells sometimes causes trouble in
>Makefiles that assume Posix `echo' where it isn't guaranteed to exist.
The problem is that Make is *not* invoking the shell built-in, therefore the
command has no chance of behaving like it does from the command line.
I am confused as to what level of support Make is trying to achieve. There are
!unixy_shell conditions and dos cmd references all over the code. What are the
purposes of these if not to handle "fundamental incompatibilities between
shells". I don't understand where the point of disagreement is. I understand
that this is not a bug in Make, but, in my opinion, this is a perfectly
reasonable enhancement. Make knows about the existence of the windows shell
'cmd.exe'. It knows what the shell built-ins are, and it already handles this
shell specially (for example, sh_cmds_dos in job.c). What reasoning is there
for excluding this functionality, when all of the other specifics associated
with this shell are handled?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), (continued)
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/21
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/23
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Christopher Faylor, 2007/04/23
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/23
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Keith Huntington, 2007/04/23
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Greg Chicares, 2007/04/23
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/23
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/23
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/24
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/21
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period),
Aaron Shatters <=
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Aaron Shatters, 2007/04/23
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/24
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Benoit Sigoure, 2007/04/24
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/24
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Benoit Sigoure, 2007/04/24
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/24
- Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Christopher Faylor, 2007/04/24
- RE: Problems with echo. (echo period), Dave Korn, 2007/04/24
Re: Problems with echo. (echo period), Eli Zaretskii, 2007/04/24