On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 03:16:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Why would we invent a different target name? I was thinking something
> roughly like
>
> check: submake $(REGRESS_PREP)
> ifdef REGRESS
> $(pg_regress_check) $(REGRESS_OPTS) $(REGRESS)
> endif
> ifdef TAP_TESTS
> $(prove_check)
> endif
>
> although getting it to print a useful response when neither symbol
> is set would require complicating things a bit. Still, as long as
> there's just one copy of this rule, messiness isn't a big problem.
OK. I have dug into that, and finished with the attached. What do you
think? One thing is that the definition of submake is moving out of
REGRESS, and .PHONY gets defined.
--
Michael
