On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattar...@gmail.com> 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.”»
