From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois_Pinard?= Subject: Re: Reloading uncompiled and testing from several git branches Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2013 19:08:35 -0500 Message-ID: <86wqu7ajjw.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca> References: <877gmvalzn.fsf@gmail.com> <87vcae53fi.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87haly96xi.fsf@gmail.com> <87zjzqejhz.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87wquumhqk.fsf@gmail.com> <87wquth35i.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ehh12gjp.fsf@gmail.com> <87halsat2l.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87lib33o0u.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87wqu81una.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <874nhc36j4.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87ehggo8db.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87zjz41r1h.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87621s1jnr.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <87r4kgmlym.fsf_-_@bzg.ath.cx> <87vc9s1h9t.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51486) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U6ro6-0007Bl-O7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 19:08:39 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U6ro3-00029s-Tf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 19:08:38 -0500 Received: from 206-248-137-202.dsl.teksavvy.com ([206.248.137.202]:57092 helo=mercure.bureau.ubity.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U6ro3-00029l-OH for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Feb 2013 19:08:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87vc9s1h9t.fsf@Rainer.invalid> (Achim Gratz's message of "Sat, 16 Feb 2013 15:10:22 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Achim Gratz writes: > .PHONY: testclean # in case you'll ever have a file named "testclean" > testclean: test clean > In general all such targets that are simple combinations of existing > teargets can be added that way. Allow me a pedantic nit-pick, yet nothing so important in practice nowadays. Any Makefile which lists dependencies while expecting them to be satisfied sequentially, one after another, is broken. Make does not (theoretically) guarantee the order, while in practice, all "make" programs I know satisfy dependencies from left to right. In theory, still, "make" and "make -j4" (say) should yield the same actions and effect. Automake-generated Makefiles respect this =E2=80=94 or= at least, they once did, I did not check in a long while. Fran=C3=A7ois P.S. In fact, for the above reason and also for a flurry of other reasons, often related to portability, almost all Makefiles are broken. It is so difficult to get them right that an AM_MAINTAINER_MODE macro has been added to Automake as a way to generate and sanctify incorrect ones. A perfect Makefile is very rare.