[FFmpeg-cvslog] r24348 - trunk/Makefile

[Måns Rullgård]

Reimar D?ffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 07:02:23PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> Reimar D?ffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de> writes:
>> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 03:35:35PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> >> Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos at ag.or.at> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > mru <subversion <at> mplayerhq.hu> writes:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Log:
>> >> >> Remove old regtest make rules redirecting to fate-based ones
>> >> >
>> >> > One of these commits removed the "success" line from the regression test.
>> >> >
>> >> > I believe that was useful, Carl Eugen
>> >> 
>> >> It was superfluous.  Make already prints a big fat message if anything
>> >> went wrong.
>> >
>> > Not sure it's worth it, but I have encountered quite a few make versions
>> > that at under some conditions would just exit without any error but also
>> > not do anything at all, even though the specified target does not
>> > even exist.
>> 
>> We don't support such broken make versions.
>
> I never fully debugged it, but I think that means we don't support any
> existing make version.

I thought it was only old versions that did that.

> It seemed to be related to make getting confused if there is a rule from
> %.rc to %.rc.o and there is also a rule for %.exe and built-in rules are
> enabled.

We disable builtin rules.  Does that make us safe?

> Also the point is just that it's not exactly "failing gracefully" just
> in case there is such a bug in make, and there's not that much of a reason
> to believe it can never happen.
> And no I am not arguing that you "have to" change it, I just can't resist
> replying when I think your reply has no relevance to the point I was
> trying to make.

I'm doing an overhaul of the test system.  I can probably add a more
detailed report if that is desired.  The old message was only printed
for the seektest anyway, so it was rather useless.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com