Tom,
Thanks very much for your help. I'll give your suggestions a shot. As
for the dependency stuff, I added it because we were having some
problems with the changes of the headers used by the .ec files not
getting picked up. Since you reminded me that it was gcc-specific, that
jogs my memory about why I asked. I had previously attempted to compile
on some other platforms (Sun's CC compiler and SGI's) some time back and
had problems. For a variety of other reasons, I think when we're
supporting those platforms, I'm going to use gcc anyway.
Thanks again,
ast
Tom Tromey wrote:
>
> >>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew S Townley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Andrew> Hi. I have been trying to add support for our ESQL/C
> Andrew> preprocessor to an Automake makefile, but I'm having trouble
> Andrew> with a couple of different things.
>
> Andrew> The extra sed command is there so that the dependencies will
> Andrew> actually be set to the .ec file instead of the generated .c
> Andrew> file and the generated file is removed at the end. This works
> Andrew> great as long as the esql command completes successfully. If
> Andrew> the esql command fails, the generated file is not removed and
> Andrew> the next time the compile takes place, it doesn't reprocess
> Andrew> the .ec file due to the implicit rules.
>
> You're saying that if the esql command fails, it still leaves the .c
> file, and so the .c.o rule is run the next time?
>
> Oops. Programs like this should always remove their temporary files.
> You could write a shell script to wrap esql and remove the file.
> Or you could do it in the Makefile rule, but that would be more ugly:
>
> esql ... ; status=$$?; rm -f temp-file > /dev/null 2>&1; exit $$status
>
> Andrew> I guess my questions boil down to: 1) is this the right way to
> Andrew> integrate a new target into the automake dependency rules, and
> Andrew> 2) without adding suffix rules for .ec -> .c -> .o, is there a
> Andrew> better way to do it?
>
> Your approach looks fine to me, except for the temp file thing.
>
> Andrew> With regards to the 1st question, I am wondering if the
> Andrew> solution is linux-specific and therefore won't work on other
> Andrew> platforms with non GNU C compilers.
>
> It is gcc-specific, not Linux-specific.
> The -Wp stuff is a gcc thing.
>
> You can just eliminate that if you don't mind getting rid of
> dependency tracking.
>
> There's no real way to have both without hacking automake itself :-(
> (At least, not in 1.4.)
>
> Tom
