[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES
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/libfoo.la (with top_builddir = ..)
> ./libfoo.la
> libfoo.la
>
> 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.
Thanks,
Bob Rossi