[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: RFC Re: [PATCH] Shorter object file names under subdir-objects

From: Thomas Martitz
Subject: Re: RFC Re: [PATCH] Shorter object file names under subdir-objects
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 10:07:37 +0200

Am 23.04.2017 um 18:39 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
Hello Thomas,

Thomas Martitz <address@hidden> writes:

good news: I found a solution.

Great!  You have been fast.  :)

You too!

I have implemented a solution. Basically the file name truncation is
disabled if the are programs or libs that have identical names. Please
tell me if that's sufficient.

I am still busy, so I will need some time before being able to review
your patch seriously.  After the 4 may, I will have more time.  Anyone
wanting to help in the review process is of course welcome.

From 8cd0a71abac70bbdcaac804dc7964fa9f34753a0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Martitz <address@hidden>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:41:59 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Shorter object file names under subdir-objects

With the %reldir% feature, object file names can become very long, because the
file names are prefixed with the %canon_reldir% substitution. The reason is to
achieve unique object file names when target-specific CFLAGS or similar are
used. When subdir-objects is also in effect, these long file names are also
placed in potentially deep subdirectories.

But with subdir-objects this is unnecessary, since uniqueness of the object
file names is already achieved by placing them next to the unique source files.

Therefore, this changes strips paths components, that are caused by
%canon_reldir% or otherwise, from the object file names. The object file name
is prefixed by the target in case of target-specific CFLAGS. As a result, the
build tree looks less scary and many cases where $var_SHORTNAME was necessary
can now be avoided. Remember that the use of $var_SHORTNAME is discouraged (and
is not always an option since it does not work inside conditionals).

There is one exception to the above: if the same source file is linked to
separate programs/libraries with per-executable flags and the
programs/libraries have identical names, then uniqueness of truncated object
file names is broken. Therefore the truncation is prevented for these targets
if there happens to be identically named progams or libraries,

  AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = subdir-objects
  bin_PROGRAMS += %D%/foo
  %C%_foo_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -g

resulted in objects:

now object file name is:
 NEWS                        |   6 +++
 bin/             |  90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 t/          |   1 +
 t/ | 115 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 207 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 t/


From 5cf501dd932b4aabcc60b489e4f19c2ad8a757cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mathieu Lirzin <address@hidden>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:19:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Test that should pass.

The test ensures that programs with equal names get unique object files even
if object file name truncation is in effect.
 t/        |  1 +
 t/ | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 t/


From 508b7e19745d88dbd1100b403fec440abfd151bb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Martitz <address@hidden>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2017 00:51:44 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Extend test with such that it
 also looks for clashes in libraries.

 t/ | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

At first glance, I think it would be reasonable to reduce the 3 tests to
only 1 which checks that there is no name clash between multiple

Can you send an updated patch which includes both your code and the
suggested test?

Sorry, I don't get which 3 tests you refer to, please explain. Currently there are two test scripts included: one checks for the object file names to see if they are truncated (or not). The other one checks in an abstract way if the wrong object file was included in a binary (due to potential name clashes with my change).

Also, do you suggest that I shall squash the 3 patch files into one? I didn't do so as to not lose the authorship information on your test script.

Best regards.

reply via email to

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