[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Automatic prerequisite generation
Re: Automatic prerequisite generation
Sun, 26 Jan 2003 14:27:29 +0000
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
Greg Chicares wrote:
Mike Capp wrote:
the MSYS shell seems too restrictive with regard to where you put your
files, running make from editors and capturing the output, and so on.
You can do
make 2>&1 |less
make some_target >/tmp/captured-output 2>&1
make 2>&1 | tee captured-output
What do you want instead?
As you doubtless guessed, I think my objections largely stemmed from
ignorance here. I'd heard that MSYS was purely an interactive shell,
based on the assumption that you'd always be running 'make' from the
supplied rxvt terminal, and the docs that came with it mostly reinforce
that impression. This would make it pretty useless as an external tool
for an editor. If, as seems to be the case, you can also run the sh.exe
directly or specify it as the system shell inside your makefile, MSYS
gets a *lot* more attractive.
And read this:
Have done, and am even beginning to understand it ;-) Seriously, the
paper's great, it's just the sed commands that scare the bejesus out of me.
several of the options look as if they're providing built-in support for
the advanced idiom Paul describes. In particular...
This option instructs CPP to add a phony target for each dependency
other than the main file, causing each to depend on nothing. These dummy
rules work around errors make gives if you remove header files without
updating the Makefile to match.
This is typical output:
test.o: test.c test.h
...which looks very much like Paul's "So, all we need to do is
post-process the original dependency file and turn all the prerequisites
into targets with no commands or prerequisites." Anyone have experience
with this switch?
>>together with a .DELETE_ON_ERROR target to handle cleanup if something
Even with that directive, I think it may
still be possible to get incomplete .d
files, if the first command works but the
second fails. I've seen weird things like
Hmm. I tried forcing various errors in the second command, and MAKE
cleaned up properly every time, but I'll believe anything where
COMMAND.COM is concerned...
Here's a solution I developed when I was still
using ms shells:
This approach requires sed, but that message
tells how to make the perfect sed, using MSYS.
To clarify a couple of things ("|>" quoted lines are from your
|> Use it to build this sed from source:
Is rolling your own sed still required? Even if you're using bash? The
current MSYS already ships with GNU sed version 3.02, and I'd worry
about a makefile that requires one particular build of one particular
sed version to work properly.
|> # Changed 2001-12-03 by GWC: replaced single quote with double
|> # quote throughout. Required for win2k.
The sed command in your post uses single quotes throughout. Did you back
the Windows-compatibility changes out when you switched to zsh? The
comments look to predate your post by a fair ways.
However, I'm still a 'make' newbie,
and suspect I'm missing something here. Are there problems with this
approach I'm not seeing?
When do dependencies get built? If you have
to decide when to rebuild them, then you can
forget. And when you do decide, do they all
get rebuilt? These are the issues Paul's
white pater deals with.
No, I was having the dependencies get built automatically using the
remaking-makefiles feature. The GNU manual's recommendation is pretty
much identical to Paul's paper up until the advanced section.
Many thanks for the tips and pointers; should keep me busy for a while :-)
Re: Automatic prerequisite generation, Michael Mounteney, 2003/01/26
Apologies for repeat post [was:Re: Automatic prerequisite generation], Mike Capp, 2003/01/29