MSC 5.1 make

[Martin Weitzel]

In article <884 at thor.wright.EDU> sdawalt at wright.EDU (Shane Dawalt) writes:
>in article <1989Dec15.021527.18711 at sjuphil.uucp>, ryan at sjuphil.uucp (Patrick M. Ryan) says:
>> 
>>      Is it just my imagination or is the version of Make which comes
>> with MSC 5.1 a pitiful imitation of the real Unix Make?
>
>  I do not use MSC, however, I have heard plenty of talk about MSC's
>make vs. Borland's make.  (Borland follows the Unix convention.)  There
>are many people wondering why their MSC make files will not produce the
>correct results under Borland's make.  I suspect that Microsoft may have
>relaxed the strict rule flow of Unix so that non-Unix users could simply
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>list their files in any order and make would run without problems ... then
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sorry, I also don't know MSC, but I don't quite understand this: Under
UNIX I *can* list my rules in any order that I want! The places, where
the order matters, are in the '.SUFFIXES:'-line and in a few special
cases the order of the dependencies after a ':' is important.

In both cases it is essential that the order matters, because 
the order resolves some ambiguities, that would otherwise exist.

>you have the Unix people wondering why MSC's make is so "strange."  :-)

Or does the smiley face mean, that I should reverse the meaning
of your words, to put it right?

-- 
<<< MW -- email: see header -- voice: 49-(0)6151-6 56 83 >>>