Re: Switching from relative paths to absolute directory specifications in make scripts?

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> This test result seems to show that it can make a significant difference
>> if such a target was specified by a relative or absolute path.
>> (I would expect that these specifications will refer to the same file.)
> 
> Keep in mind that targets are opaque strings,

I would prefer a more convenient handling of build goals in some use cases.

I noticed once more how relevant implicit make rules can become
in this test case.


> not references to files as such, and hence the exact path matters.

The make software manages also a bit of extra background information.

How interesting can it become to filter targets if they are phony (or not)?


> E.g. "foo", "./foo",  and "bar/../foo" are all different targets as far
> as make is concerned, even if they all resolve to the same file on disk.

Can the software situation be improved any more there?


>> Do I need to extend the software build rules a bit more here?
> 
> Yep, you need to fix your makefile if you want it to work with both
> relative and absolute paths.

I can adjust specific make scripts to some degree. Will it be better
to avoid the duplication of corresponding build rules?


> If you are doing complicated things, especially if you have
> a modular build system with makefiles in different sub-directories
> referring to the same files, you need to be careful how you use and
> construct target paths so they are consistent.

* Do you specify any extra explicit (non-pattern) make rules then?

* How are the chances to reduce any inconveniences there?

Regards,
Markus