Re: ^c now disallowed? (was Re: "cd dir && $(MAKE)", not "cd dir; $(MAKE)")

Andrew Cagney
2003-01-02T14:56:34Z

>>> To me there are legitimate reasons why a developer would want
>>> "make ; ^c ; make" to work.
>
>>
>>I agree.
>>
>
>>> If by "key files" you mean "the target of the rule" I _think_ we're
>
>>ok.
>>
>>I'm thinking that some rules might alter non-target files (like
>>config.cache for configure), which might cause problems.
>
>
> If you didn't interrupt a subconfigure pass, you should be fine.
> If you did, you should delete the appropriate config.cache, the
> appropriate Makefile, and anything else generated or modified by that
> 'configure', and then you should be fine. At least that's my belief.

Right, however, there lies the problem.

In the past, with separate configure / build phases, this was easy -
cntrl-c the configure and blow away the directory tree. Now, with the
configure phases intermingled with the build phases, doing this has
become that much harder.

All that is hopefully needed is a bit of dependency tweaking - touch
something after the configure phase completes and depend on that.

Andrew