bug#7824: Automatic chaining of make suffix rules (was: Re: bug#7824: won't fix)

[Юрий Пухальский]

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Stefano Lattarini
<address@hidden> wrote:
> [Re-adding the list, as this discussion is worth being registered in
> the archives IMHO]
>
Ok.

>>>> The situation is that both of the approaches (.pc.c rule and .pc.lo
>>>> rule) have problems entailed.
>>>
>>>>  * .pc.lo rule doesn't create tags for *.pc sources.
>>>>
>>> Try to add the relevant '.pc' files to $(TAGS_FILES) explicitly.  It should
>>> solve your issue.  If it doesn't, you've found a new Automake bug, which I
>>> will gladly fix :-)
>>
>> Ah, ok! I knew there must be something like that.
>> But why in the first place it doesn't do it automatically? I have it
>> in the _SOURCES… Is it afraid of the .pc extension?
>>
> I'm not sure actually.  Might be a tiny bug in automake.  Care to open a
> new report about the issue, so I won't forget?  I'll get to it eventually,
> but not right now.
I'll doublecheck to be sure and will do.

>
>>>
>>>>  * .pc.c rule doesn't work on HP-UX.
>>>>
>>> Which is the "wontfix" bug unfortunately.  IMHO you should start lobbying
>>> for the use of GNU make whenever possible, or you'll miss all the exciting
>>> new features of Automake-NG ;-)
>>
>> "Und grün des Lebens goldner Baum…"
>>
>> Alas! My thing must be highly portable. I'm not sure who's guilty in
>> this case, maybe HP,
>>
> Well, their make is busted in another, more relevant way:
>
>   <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/autoconf-patches/2011-01/msg00031.html>
>
> And the INSTALL file from Automake itself reads:
>
>    HP-UX `make' updates targets which have the same time stamps as
>    their prerequisites, which makes it generally unusable when shipped
>    generated files such as `configure' are involved.  Use GNU `make'
>    instead.
>
> This behaviour of HP-UX also violates the POSIX standard.
>
> But back to your use case, the HP-UX issue at hand (not chaining suffix
> rules automatically) is shared with at least another make implementation,
> that is, Solaris XPG4 make.  But I usually don't care much about that
> one, because Solaris users have other, much better make implementations
> available from their vendor (that is, CCS make and Sun Distributed
> make) which doesn't suffer from that limitation.  The *BSD makes don't
> suffer from it either.  As for AIX, IRIX and OSF1/Tru64, I don't have
> access to those systems, so I can't test how their make implementations
> behave.
I have aix 5.3 and aix 6.1 here. So if you tell me how it's best to
check… As far as i remember i haven't had this very problem on AIX.

>
>> but probably kicking austin group for clarification is not that
>> bad idea.
>>
> It's a pretty good one indeed.  Especially if you are volunteering :-)
I've positive experience already. Ok, well, will put it to the list of
thing to do.

>
> Thanks,
>   Stefano



-- 
«Every person has a certain horizon. When it narrows and becomes
infinitely small, it changes into a point and then the person says:
“This is my point of view.”»