[jamming] Implicit action won't work
bonefish at cs.tu-berlin.de
Mon Feb 10 06:31:10 PST 2003
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Russell wrote:
> Ingo Weinhold wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Russell wrote:
> >>I don't know why "actions HEX" doesn't work. There's no jam options
> >>to put out a simple dependency tree.
> > Mmh, what is wrong with `-d3'?
> I just saw that a space was used after -d at
That's not what I was driving at -- the space doesn't matter -- I was
merely saying, that this option does print a dependency tree.
> > Your problem here is that HEX is invoked on myprog.exe, not on myprog.hex.
> This how i thought it worked: rule HEX is invoked with "HEX myprog : myprog.exe ;",
> causing action HEX to be invoked with arguments "myprog : myprog.exe"
> > Thus for jam no rule is invoked on myprog.hex and hence it can't execute
> > any actions.
> > You can work around by renaming the actions to HEX1 and add
> > `HEX1 $(_h) : $(>) ;' to your HEX rule. This way HEX1 is called for your
> > target and the respective actions will be executed.
> I thought if rule HEX was executed, then action HEX would *always* be
> executed too. It says here:
Obviously it's not right.
More information about the jamming