Re: [PATCH] fix parallel make problem

"Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

+.PRECIOUS: $(patsubst test-%$X,test-%.o,$(TEST_PROGRAMS))
+
 test-%$X: test-%.o $(GITLIBS)
 	$(QUIET_LINK)$(CC) $(ALL_CFLAGS) -o $@ $(ALL_LDFLAGS) $(filter %.o,$^) $(LIBS)

Add a comment here?

I did not see a particular need for that.  What would you say
there?

quoted

Warning: 1 path touched but unmodified. Consider running git-status.

BTW, shouldn't the warning go to standard error?

No, usually you are under PAGER, so we need to send this to
stdout.  We do this only when we are generating textual diff
which will be consumed by patch or git-apply.  They both know
how to ignore such a non patch material.

Quoting Junio C Hamano [off-list ref]:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix parallel make problem

"Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

quoted

+.PRECIOUS: $(patsubst test-%$X,test-%.o,$(TEST_PROGRAMS))
+
 test-%$X: test-%.o $(GITLIBS)
 	$(QUIET_LINK)$(CC) $(ALL_CFLAGS) -o $@ $(ALL_LDFLAGS) $(filter %.o,$^) $(LIBS)

Add a comment here?

I did not see a particular need for that.  What would you say
there?

That it's a work-around for make bug.

quoted

quoted

Warning: 1 path touched but unmodified. Consider running git-status.

BTW, shouldn't the warning go to standard error?

No, usually you are under PAGER, so we need to send this to
stdout.  We do this only when we are generating textual diff
which will be consumed by patch or git-apply.  They both know
how to ignore such a non patch material.

So how did this end up in your mail?

-- 
MST