On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 11:15:43AM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > > But why does make complain here only sometimes? Does it depend on the > > version of make? > > It seems to depend on the version of make you're using. On my system, > 'make' is GNU Make 4.4.90, which has the more restrictive checks around > the recipe prefix in nested conditionals. > > With that version (and the pre-image of this commit), I get: > > $ make -v | head -1 && make DEVELOPER=1 2>&1 | head -1 > GNU Make 4.4.90 > config.mak.dev:13: extraneous text after 'ifneq' directive > > , but with /usr/bin/make (which on my machine is GNU Make 4.3), I > instead get: > > $ /usr/bin/make -v | head -1 && /usr/bin/make DEVELOPER=1 2>&1 | head -1 > GNU Make 4.3 > GIT_VERSION = 2.45.2.746.g06e570c0df Ah, thanks for digging. That makes perfect sense (I'm on 4.3 from Debian unstable). > On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 11:15:43AM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > > It is tempting to just want to rip out support for older compilers, but > > given that ebd2e4a13a (Makefile: restrict -Wpedantic and > > -Wno-pedantic-ms-format better, 2021-09-28) is only three years old, I > > imagine that some builders may still want support for older / pre-GCC 4 > > compilers. > > Hmm... thinking on it more, edb2e4a13a hasn't been working at all on the > older versions of Make that people with ancient compilers are likely > also using. So it's possible that that commit isn't doing as much as we > think, in which case we could rip it out altogether. Right, that's what I meant by "nobody seems to have complained". But as you note, it's not like it gets rid of the detect-compiler script. It's just this one check. So it doesn't hurt much to leave it. -Peff
