Re: Brittle -includes

[Paul Smith]

On Mon, 2019-10-21 at 07:51 +0200, David Deutsch wrote:
> On 10/21/19 7:29 AM, Paul Smith wrote:
> > I can only assume that the rules in question are pattern rules.  If
> > they were explicit rules then make would indeed give you a more clear
> > declaration of which file is missing.
> 
> Actually, I'm quite sure that they are explicit rules. I will try to put
> together a simple example to recreate the issue.

OK.

> > Unfortunately I didn't really understand the process you're using.  Why
> > do you need to write hundreds or thousands of makefiles?
> 
> I think the process I'm using is best understood by its requirement:
> Pattern rules with multiple, named %'s. I call them blueprints and they
> produce makefiles that give you the set of targets and recipes to create
> complex prerequisites.

OK, but, make doesn't support multiple pattern characters in a single
target, as you're aware.  So I'm not sure what exactly you're asking us
to comment on.