Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com From: Chris Faylor Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 00:17:53 -0400 To: "'cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com'" Subject: Re: Make --win32 shell bug? Message-ID: <20001018001753.C1520@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Mail-Followup-To: "'cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com'" References: <50028CAE26D1D3118C7F00A0CC50D6256A92CD AT EMWARESERVER> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i In-Reply-To: <50028CAE26D1D3118C7F00A0CC50D6256A92CD@EMWARESERVER>; from scarter@emware.com on Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 09:19:32PM -0600 On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 09:19:32PM -0600, Scott Carter wrote: >Like Chris, if I run the makefile, exactly as shown, I get the "unterminated >call" error. However, if I modify the makefile to something that makes >sense, i.e. >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >OBJLST := $(shell echo \ >xxx) >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >(note the backslash at the end of the first line), then I get the >"STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION" error that Anshil cited. Was the missing backslash >perhaps a typo in the email? Without the backslash, the "unterminated call" >error seems appropriate. But with the backslash, the >"STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION" error seems inappropriate -- perhaps that is the >'bug' that Anshil was trying to ask about. > >I'm running make 3.79-3 on cygwin 1.1.2. The latest make is 3.79.1-1. My version doesn't get a STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION with this file, even if I add a backslash. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com