4 ms·
Other sibling comments express that you can push the dependency graph into the targets, but if you really do need a-d to be built in order then it seems more st
by smallnamespace 4y ago
Other sibling comments express that you can push the dependency graph into the targets, but if you really do need a-d to be built in order then it seems more straightforward to just execute them all as a single target:
FORCE:
a b c d: FORCE
run-a && run-b && run-c && run-d
- jgrahamc 4y agoThat's not a "single target". That's four targets and is equivalent to: FORCE: a: FORCE run-a && run-b && run-c && run-d b: FORCE run-a && run-b && run-c && run-d c: FORCE run-a && run-b && run-c && run-d d: FORCE run-a && run-b && run-c && run-d
- smallnamespace 4y agoThanks for the catch, to get the desired behavior you can use 'Grouped Targets'[1] with the following syntax: a b c d &: FORCE ... Note that this is a GNU make-ism, not sure what BSD make does. [1] https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Multiple-Targets.html https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Multiple-...
- jgrahamc 4y agoYeah, but that's such a recent addition I tend to avoid it.