On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 05:51:35PM +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Brian Dessent wrote on Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 04:45:54PM CEST:
> > It would be equally difficult as in the case with MULTITARGETS and
> > foo_{TARGETS,SOURCES,COMMAND}, no?
>
> Well, the first step in exploring this further would be somebody writing
> out how suitable generated rules should look like: if you can then
> factor it from the input that you're getting, that's already half of the
> work done.
>
> In any case, I won't be working on this right now due to time
> constraints, sorry.
Unfortunately, both of you are talking over my head. I don't have all
that much experience with make. However, I've worked on a lot of open
source projects, and all of them do this common task.
They generate files during build time, and modify BUILT_SOURCES...
In fact, think of the bison or flex extension (adding .y or .l files to
the _SOURCES variable). That is just another use of this general
functionality that I'm talking about. In some sense, it would be like me
adding foo.xml to the _SOURCES, but telling automake how to turn that
into a .c file. I want to run foo.py, whereas automake runs bison or
flex.
I'm sure that if this was implemented, a LOT of projects would use it.
So, is there something I can do to help implement it, with my little
experience writing make file rules?
Thanks,
Bob Rossi
