Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!rogerc
From: rogerc@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM (Roger Collins)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.sys5
Subject: make bug?
Message-ID: <2979@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM>
Date: 18 Jan 88 14:57:55 GMT
Organization: NCR - E & M Columbia
Lines: 31

When make is executed with the following description file,

-------------------------------------------
x :	x.o

x.o :	x.c

x.c :
	echo "main(){}" >x.c
-------------------------------------------

	1. x.c gets made by the explicit "echo ..." command
	2. x.o gets made by the default .c.o rule
	3. nothing is done to make x (because of the explicit nothing?)

Why does no-command mean use default rule in one case, yet it means do
nothing in another case?

I added the explicit rule ".o: cc $< -o $@" to the beginning of
the description file; no change.  Just for fun I added the explicit 
rule ".c.o: cc -c $<".  Then only the the .c file was made.

I am running Sys5.2.

This seems like a bug to me.  I think no-command should mean if rule exists,
use it, otherwise print diagnostic.  What do you think?

--
Roger Collins
NCR - E&M Columbia - TOWER Systems
rogerc@ncrcae.Columbia.NCR.COM