From: Jerzy Klejnowski Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Make, suffix rules and pattern rules. Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:24:16 +0100 Organization: samotnik w swoim zamku Lines: 18 Message-ID: <3A04A8B0.2D334BD9@polbox.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: pc101.wroclaw.ppp.tpnet.pl Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.tpi.pl 973380257 6870 212.160.40.101 (4 Nov 2000 23:24:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet AT tpi DOT pl NNTP-Posting-Date: 4 Nov 2000 23:24:17 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i686) To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I cannot reproduce this: all of the above variants work for me, using > what you call ``my rule''. Perhaps you omitted something from this > Makefile snippet, and that omitted part is responsible for the > problem. The difference arises from the fact, that there was no header file in current directory (when I met this problem my makefile was in some sort of "intermediate state": there were no headers as prerequisites earlier, and I wanted to add them). However, I don't understand why `make' chooses another rule for building target depending on existence of some prerequisites. Shouldn't it try to build files it cannot find instead?