[Top][All Lists]

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


From: Bob Rossi
Subject: Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:57:05 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.12-2006-07-14

On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 07:52:02PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Bob,
> * Bob Rossi wrote on Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 05:44:59PM CET:
> > 
> > OK, from this suggestion, I'm going to change all _LDADD lines from
> > -lfoo to $(top_builddir)/pathto/libfoo.a.
> > 
> > I'll remove all _DEPENDENCIES completly. Does this sound like a correct
> > change to you?
> Yes.
> > BTW, all the _DEPENDENCIES that I'm talking about are
> > libraries that are built from my own project, but not necessarily in the
> > same Makefile.
> OK.  You will have to make sure these libraries exist and are up to
> date, when they are needed.  Typically by recursing to that other
> Makefile earlier (i.e., by way of SUBDIRS ordering).
> For libraries built from the same Makefile, please note that typically,
> make implementations are not smart enough to discover that
>   $(top_builddir)/sub/  (with top_builddir = ..)
>   ./
> all refer to the same file, even if they are the same file.  So if you
> have a rule for the latter, but depend upon one of the former two,
> things can break.  GNU make identifies the latter two.

Thanks very much. Yes I do make sure thing are built in the correct
order with SUBDIRS. I wonder if this will really fix the 
'parallel make bug' that someone reported about CGDB.

Bob Rossi

reply via email to

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