autoconf
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: configure vs. multi-build environments


From: Troy Cauble
Subject: Re: configure vs. multi-build environments
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 14:04:34 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS sun4u; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020606

Steve M. Robbins wrote:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 12:24:05PM -0400, Troy Cauble wrote:

Greetings,

I write a lot of Makefiles that support a codebase that builds for
a handful of targets.  Basically, every Makefile does

   make -C <build_dir> -f ../Makefile SECOND_TIME=1 $@

where <build_dir> is determined by environment variables.
Some of the "alternate" build environments are cross-compiles
for embedded targets, some are other local builds on machines
that NFS mount my working directories.

This gives me the ability build and test changes to my working
directories on multiple targets without copying a lot of
files back and forth.  Also, the object files for one environment
don't get blown away when I compile & test another.


Now, I'd like to integrate a large, third-party, configure-based
codebase into this environment.  I'd like to have the same capabilities
listed in the previous paragraph, although the mechanism can
be different.

What's the best way to achieve this?


I don't know how you should integrate this with your set up,
so I can't address "best way" ...

However, the canonical method for multiple builds with
*properly*-set-up configure-based code is pretty simple:

    mkdir build_dir1
    cd build_dir1
    ../configure ... options for platform 1 ...
    make

    cd ..

    mkdir build_dir2
    cd build_dir2
    ../configure ... options for platform 2 ...
    make


Oh yes, "../configure"!
I should have remembered that from building GCC using GCC!

Thanks,
-troy







reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]