From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: distclean failure Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 21:42:45 +0100 Message-ID: <20080801204245.GC4526@implementation> References: <200808011614.56245.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> <20080801141820.GU4553@implementation.uk.xensource.com> <489371B1.1030600@goop.org> <20080801203642.GB4526@implementation> <489374BF.4010802@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <489374BF.4010802@goop.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: Christoph Egger , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Jeremy Fitzhardinge, le Fri 01 Aug 2008 13:40:31 -0700, a =E9crit : > Samuel Thibault wrote: > >Jeremy Fitzhardinge, le Fri 01 Aug 2008 13:27:29 -0700, a =E9crit : > > =20 > >>>+ [ ! -d libxc ] || $(MAKE) -C libxc clean > >>>+ [ ! -d ioemu ] || $(MAKE) -C ioemu clean > >>> =20 > >>Are you sure you don't not need a double negative there? > >> =20 > > > >Mmm, why? The clean target succeeds if either there is not even > >libxc/ioemu directories, or the make clean there works. > > =20 >=20 > I'm just pointing out that >=20 > [ -d libxc ] && $(MAKE) -C libxc clean >=20 > is more straightforward. But it makes the rule fail if the directory doesn't exist. Samuel