From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15945 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2000 10:39:37 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 21 Feb 2000 10:39:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 12467 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2000 10:39:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9813 Received: (qmail 12458 invoked from network); 21 Feb 2000 10:39:28 -0000 Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 10:39:23 +0000 From: Adam Spiers To: zsh workers mailing list Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: duplicate targets in Makefile rule Message-ID: <20000221103923.A11977@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Reply-To: Adam Spiers Mail-Followup-To: zsh workers mailing list References: <20000221021201.A27957@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: ; from zefram@fysh.org on Mon, Feb 21, 2000 at 10:07:49AM +0000 X-Home-Page: http://www.new.ox.ac.uk/~adam/ X-OS: Linux 2.2.12 i686 Zefram (zefram@fysh.org) wrote: > Adam Spiers wrote: > >> Not portable: $< does not portably exist > > > >*sigh* You learn something every day. Why is it not meaningful > >though, out of curiosity? > > There may be many (or no) dependencies in an explicit rule, whereas $< > is defined (for an implicit rule) to expand to the exactly one dependency. I see. I've only ever used GNU make, so I'd unconsciously assumed that what the info pages say would be true for most makes: `$<' The name of the first dependency. If the target got its commands from an implicit rule, this will be the first dependency added by the implicit rule (*note Implicit Rules::.).