[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Hurd source tree; inter-directory dependencies

From: Thomas Schwinge
Subject: Re: Hurd source tree; inter-directory dependencies
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 12:23:00 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 06:07:57PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Bas Wijnen wrote on Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 09:58:47AM CEST:
> > 
> > In one of my projects, I use the nonrecursive approach, but I still have a
> > Makefile.am per directory.

That's also what I had in mind when thinking about switching to a
non-recursive build layout.

I'm now going this route and it's working just fine so far.  :-)

> Yes, it's a good idea to group things this way (by using included
> Makefile.am snippets)

I'm now using a `Makefrag.am' per module, i.e. per directory.

> > There's one major hack in there: automake doesn't support += on things like
> > bin_PROGRAMS, so I had to create temporary variables for it and do
> > bin_PROGRAMS = $(programs).
> This sounds awfully like a bug in an old Automake version to me.

I can confirm that this is not necessary with recent versions of

> > And
> > finally, my tree builds all the programs (and libraries) to top_builddir.
> > Check out the nobase_ prefix if you don't want that.
> Check out the Automake option subdir-objects, if you don't want that.

Also works just fine.  :-)


reply via email to

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