Re: The explanation of order-only prerequisites is not clear

[ali hagigat]

David,

I am receiving quality answers and nice explanations by Paul Smith and
a few others, Paul and some others understand what I am trying to do.
My purpose is not to scorn people or to find fault with them at all.

I am here to promote open source activity and have a good time for it.
My main purpose is to deal with the technical details and then I may
be able to help some people like you to expand the boundary of
computer knowledge.

Sorry if you felt some thing bad but I really did not mean it.

The style of writing the make manual seems a bit confusing to me.
Compare with Intel documents. Sorry to complain again but I just want
to express myself though i know that my ideas have definitely
problems.


On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 10:22 AM, David Ferguson <address@hidden> wrote:
> Ali,
> You're abusing the privilege you've been granted.  People on this list are 
> more than happy to help educate newbies and experts alike.  You've been the 
> recipient of consultant advice worth literally tens of thousands from the 
> best resources on the planet.  And yet, you continue to start almost every 
> message with an inflammatory, accusatory tone and statement.    And then 
> plead for help.
>
> Amazingly enough, the document you repeatedly disparage has been incredibly 
> useful, clear, and concise to myself and thousands of others who have used it 
> to guide development projects supporting 10 - 10000 developers.
>
> Could you please TRY not to insult the few people who are still trying to 
> help you?
>
> -daf
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
> ...
>> I asked you to explain it but you only repeated what was in
>> the manual!! I have the manual dear and if it was clear I
>> never asked you.
>> I am sorry but I want to take up your time again and ask some more
>> questions:
> ...
>>
>> 1) If I specify  an order-only prerequisite, will be
>> evaluated sooner than other normal prerequisites? if yes, why
>> the manual clearly does not say that?
>>
>> 2) Instead of "target to be updated" you could say, the
>> command or recipe of the target which is to be executed" as follows:
>>
>> If a target has an order-only prerequisite and that
>> order-only prerequisite is a file(or directory) and it is
>> updated(because it may be the target of some other rule
>> itself), the command or recipe of that target will not be executed.
>> Did i understand the purpose of the order-only prerequisite?
>> Is my sentence more clear than the manual?!!
>>
>> Thank you to read my message and sorry to take up the time of
>> all people and user's of the list.
>