bug#7824: 1.11 doesn't add sources with nonstandard suffixes when making a binary

[Stefano Lattarini]

Hello Юрий.

On Wednesday 12 January 2011, Юрий Пухальский wrote:
> So i put it all together.
> 
> If i have a Makefile like this:
> -----------------------------
> SUFFIXES = .pc
> 
> .pc.lo:
>       cp $(srcdir)/$*.pc $(builddir)/$*.c
>       $(LTCOMPILE) -c $(builddir)/$*.c
>       rm -f $(builddir)/$*.c
> 
> noinst_PROGRAMS = 1 2
> 
> 1_SOURCES = 1.pc
> 
> db_src = 1.pc
> 2_SOURCES = dummy.c
> 2_LDADD = $(db_src:.pc=.lo)
> -----------------------------
> 1 is not built:
> --------------------------------
> devfe:~/tmp/test>make
> /bin/sh ./libtool --tag=CC   --mode=link gcc  -g -O2   -o 1
> libtool: link: gcc -g -O2 -o 1
> gcc: no input files
> make: *** [1] Error 1
> --------------------------------
> 
> If i make a rule .pc.c, then i have problem on HP-UX.
> 
> I'd say the first approach is legitimate - i make whatever rule i
> want, i use .pc in SOURCES, and automake should take care of
> everything else, like it's stated in the doc?
> Second approach is ok too - for i don't see any limitation on
> transitive rules in standard.
> 
> On the other hand, putting explicit dependencies in case of makes like
> that on HP-UX could be done in automake. It's cruddy to do it
> manually...
> 
> Can You comment on this?
> 
> PS. If one can use a decent make, there is no need for automake:)))
>
Just a quick note: you might want to take a look at automake bug#7670:
 <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=7670>
 <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-automake/2010-12/msg00034.html>
which is closely related to yours.

(BTW, these two bug reports are so similar that they should probably
be merged).

Regards,
  Stefano