lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: DOCS: include a sample "Makefile"?


From: Peter Chubb
Subject: Re: DOCS: include a sample "Makefile"?
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 07:53:55 +1000
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.7 MULE XEmacs/21.4 (patch 22) (Instant Classic) (x86_64-linux-gnu)

>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Kulp <address@hidden> writes:

Jonathan> Peter Chubb wrote:
>> There are alternatives.  The main objection I have to the form of
>> makefile you propose is that dependencies are not tracked, so
>> editing one file will either not rebuild anything, or will rebuild
>> everything (depending on the rules).
>> 
>> In general, it's best to name all the inputs directly.
>> --

Jonathan> An excellent objection.  I've tried this makefile you
Jonathan> posted:


Jonathan> And I like how it tracks whether the pdf is up-to-date.  I'm
Jonathan> trying now to adapt it to the stamitz symphony, and I've
Jonathan> gotten it to compile the score, but if I run "make score"
Jonathan> again (while there's a current pdf output of the file in the
Jonathan> PDF dir), instead of saying it's up-to-date, it compiles the
Jonathan> file again.  Can you tell me which part of the makefile
Jonathan> keeps track of the pdf output?  Here's what I'm using:

Get rid of the explicit commands for score--- Make tries to find a
file called score, and when there isn;t one, it runs the commands
associated with it.  The implicit commands should build the score for you.

Dr Peter Chubb  http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au  peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au           ERTOS within National ICT Australia
A university is a non-profit organisation only in the sense that it
spends everything it gets  ... Luca Turin.




reply via email to

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