Hi,
On 2013-07-26 16:53 +0100, Rudra Banerjee wrote:
> Hello friends,
> In my laptop, I can very well use autotools with the following
> Makefile.am :
> bin_PROGRAMS = scasr
> scasr_SOURCES = src/main.f90\
> src/constants.f90 src/environment.f90 src/util.f90 \
>
Hello friends,
In my laptop, I can very well use autotools with the following
Makefile.am :
bin_PROGRAMS = scasr
scasr_SOURCES = src/main.f90\
src/constants.f90 src/environment.f90 src/util.f90 \
src/init.f90
src/constants.o : src/constants.f90
src/environment.
On 2013-03-24 11:33 +, Roger Leigh wrote:
> If you switch to non-recursive make (i.e. no use of SUBDIRS),
> but you want to use "include" to retain Makefile.ams in
> subdirectories, you end up running into problems when you
> have multiple copies of -local and -hook rules.
[...]
> I've used GNU
Hi,
Just a suggestion for the documentation:
If you switch to non-recursive make (i.e. no use of SUBDIRS),
but you want to use "include" to retain Makefile.ams in
subdirectories, you end up running into problems when you
have multiple copies of -local and -hook rules.
For example, I have
% grep
Harlan Stenn writes:
> Larry McVoy once said something like "In theory, theory and practice are
> the same. But in practice, they are not."
Maybe he did say that at some point, but it's a hoary old quote
(attributed to Yogi Berra, among others), and certainly didn't originate
with Larry...
-Mil
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Nick Bowler wrote:
> * Modify gnulib so that it can be easily integrated into a
> non-recursive automake setup. One could look to libltdl for
> inspiration here.
How about modifying GCC. That should take some time, I think :) :) :)
On 2011-03-22 07:36 -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> Nick Bowler writes:
>
> > * Modify gnulib so that it can be easily integrated into a
> > non-recursive automake setup. One could look to libltdl for
> > inspiration here.
>
> It doesn't have to be modi
Nick Bowler writes:
> * Modify gnulib so that it can be easily integrated into a
> non-recursive automake setup. One could look to libltdl for
> inspiration here.
It doesn't have to be modified. An Automake setup can easily and
usefully contain a mix of recursive and
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Roger Leigh wrote:
> Can't automake rewrite the relative paths to be absolute?
This would break things, for example when using WINE via wrapper
scripts, require fixed srcdir pathes...
oki,
Steffen
ggestions which could be part of a GSoC project about
non-recursive automake. I have no idea what the scope of these are.
* Modify automake so that package authors can specify source files
more easily in a non-recursive setup. Currently, the full path from
the top of the source tre
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:49:39AM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > Pippijn wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> >> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> >> > automake
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Pippijn wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
>> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
>> > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
>> > co-m
On 03/19/2011 01:45 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> Pippijn wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
>>> If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
>>> automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
>>> co-mentor and wor
Hello Pippijn,
* Pippijn van Steenhoven wrote on Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:47:35AM CET:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Pippijn van Steenhoven wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to
Pippijn wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Pippijn van Steenhoven wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> > > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be w
Pippijn wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> > co-mentor and work with them to convert NTP to that sort of opera
Hi Ralf,
Ralf wrote:
> * Harlan Stenn wrote on Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 01:26:58AM CET:
> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> > co-mentor and work with them to convert NTP to that sort of
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Pippijn van Steenhoven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> > co-mentor
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> co-mentor and work with them to convert NTP to that sort of operation.
It's mostly trivi
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:38:39AM +0100, Pippijn van Steenhoven wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 05:26:58PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote:
> > If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> > automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> > co-mentor
Hi Harlan,
* Harlan Stenn wrote on Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 01:26:58AM CET:
> If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
> automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
> co-mentor and work with them to convert NTP to that sort of operation.
Thanks
If there was a student interested in showing how "easy" it was to use
automake to do non-recursive Makefiles for a project, I'd be willing to
co-mentor and work with them to convert NTP to that sort of operation.
--
Harlan Stenn
http://ntpforum.isc.org - be a member!
Hi John,
* John Darrington wrote on Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:56:20PM CET:
> I like to use a non-recursive makefile structure for my projects.
> However, if the project also uses gettext, I end up having to
> constantly fight against both gettext and auto{conf,make}.
>
> If AM_GNU_GETTEXT appears i
Hi Ralf and others,
I like to use a non-recursive makefile structure for my projects. However, if
the project also uses gettext, I end up having to constantly fight against both
gettext and auto{conf,make}.
If AM_GNU_GETTEXT appears in the configure.ac file, then automake refuses to
run, but g
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:39 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello,
>
> * Jan Engelhardt wrote on Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 07:04:39PM CEST:
>> when one decides to drive make in a non-recursive fashion, one has to
>> write an Automake file like this:
>>
>> lib_LTLIBRARIES = foo/bar.la
>> foo_bar_la_SOURCE
On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 08:39 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/automake/2001-08/msg00112.html
> >
> > This added a new directive 'subdir_include' which does an include but
> > adjusts all the paths in the make/automake rules in the included
> > fragment to the relative
Hello,
* Jan Engelhardt wrote on Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 07:04:39PM CEST:
> when one decides to drive make in a non-recursive fashion, one has to
> write an Automake file like this:
>
> lib_LTLIBRARIES = foo/bar.la
> foo_bar_la_SOURCES = foo/one.c foo/two.c
>
> Usually I stuff that into a file cal
On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 20:09 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
>
> I complained about this perhaps five years ago since it is the most
> annoying issue related to non-recursive build. There was some
> discussion on this list at that time but nothing was done to make
> things better.
>
> It seems t
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
when one decides to drive make in a non-recursive fashion, one has to
write an Automake file like this:
lib_LTLIBRARIES = foo/bar.la
foo_bar_la_SOURCES = foo/one.c foo/two.c
Usually I stuff that into a file called "foo/Automakefile" and "include
foo/A
Hi,
when one decides to drive make in a non-recursive fashion, one has to
write an Automake file like this:
lib_LTLIBRARIES = foo/bar.la
foo_bar_la_SOURCES = foo/one.c foo/two.c
Usually I stuff that into a file called "foo/Automakefile" and "include
foo/Automakefile" from the real Makefile.am
Stepan Kasal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> well, it was me who created the controversy here. :-)
> I presume you use AC_CONFIG_LIBOBJ_DIR to specify a certain directory,
> and then you call AC_LIBOBJ with object names (without any directory
> components). Then you use LIBOBJS or LTLIBOBJS in th
Hello Russ,
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 12:09:22AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> >> An even better solution would be for Automake to pay attention to
> >> AC_CONFIG_LIBOBJ_DIR and look for AC_LIBOBJ files there.
>
> > This is already fixed in CVS Automake. It needs CVS Autoconf though.
> > And the LI
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Russ Allbery wrote on Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:05:11AM CEST:
>> AC_LIBOBJ([util/snprintf])
>> configure.ac:25: required file `./util/snprintf.c' not found
> I think it wasn't intended that AC_LIBOBJ ever be called with something
> other than a plain
Hi Russ,
* Russ Allbery wrote on Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 04:05:11AM CEST:
>
> AC_LIBOBJ([util/snprintf])
> configure.ac:25: required file `./util/snprintf.c' not found
I think it wasn't intended that AC_LIBOBJ ever be called with something
other than a plain name (i.e., no directory components).
I originally submitted this as a Debian bug, but it's more relevant here.
I'm using Automake with a package that has its source in various
subdirectories but builds the whole package with a single non-recursive
Makefile, as mentioned in the Automake manual under Directories /
Alternative. Everyth
it doesn't seem to work.
>
> Can anyone tell me the correct way to create a non-recursive automake
> system, which might have identically named source files?
In your configure.ac, make sure AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE is given the
subdir-objects option (you'll also need a recent automake
Hi John,
* John Darrington wrote on Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 03:42:37AM CET:
> I've been trying to convert a rather largish automake controlled
> project from a recursive style build system, to a non-recursive one.
> I was rather suprised to see that automake decides to put all the
> object files in t
prog2/bar
prog1_foo_SOURCES = prog1/main.c
prog2_bar_SOURCES = prog2/main.c
Reading the manual suggests that I should be able to prefix the
SOURCES variables with nobase_ but it doesn't seem to work.
Can anyone tell me the correct way to create a non-recursive automake
system, which
> "Bob" == Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bob> Note that the messages appear to indicate that Automake does recurse
Bob> once regardless.
Some features require a $(MAKE) invocation in the same directory.
Offhand I forget what. As I recall, removing this would be tricky.
Tom
Hello Bob,
> % time gmake
> gmake all-am
> gmake[1]: Entering directory
> `/scratch/bfriesen/build/GraphicsMagick-16-static'
> gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/scratch/bfriesen/build/GraphicsMagick-16-static'
> gmake 0.78s user 0.10s system 88% cpu 0.990 total
> %
>
> Note that the messages appea
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, tom fogal wrote:
Your arguments are convincing, I will switch my setup away from
convenience archives.
As you proceed with your non-recursive build, be sure to keep in mind
that you are leaving the common path so you can expect to encounter
more bugs or things that need
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
"tom" == tom fogal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
tom> Basically I'd like each module to build their own libtool convenience
tom> library, and then have /src/Makefile.am link all of those modules'
tom> convenience libraries into one that is the union of all
*mutter*, forgot to cc the list again...
--- Forwarded Message
From: tom fogal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: non-recursive automake advice?
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:29:09 CDT."
<[EMAI
> "tom" == tom fogal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
tom> Basically I'd like each module to build their own libtool convenience
tom> library, and then have /src/Makefile.am link all of those modules'
tom> convenience libraries into one that is the union of all of them.
Do you really want each sep
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, tom fogal wrote:
So I've been convinced that the effort involved in changing a build
system to not use recursive make is worth it, and I was wondering if
A noble objective.
Unfortunately in the 'Inc.am' files I need to remember to qualify every
filename with not just '$(
So I've been convinced that the effort involved in changing a build
system to not use recursive make is worth it, and I was wondering if
anyone had some good advice as to how I should go about doing this,
since my way seems to be having issues =).
I have a directory setup like the following:
/
/s
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, John Darrington wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:38:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> Does src1/foo.c exist?
>
> Yes.
>
> Are you using Automake 1.7.9?
>
> No. I was using 1.7.6 and it seemed that atl_SOURCES=src1/foo.c
> works fine with this version. So presu
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 02:38:52PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Does src1/foo.c exist?
Yes.
Are you using Automake 1.7.9?
No. I was using 1.7.6 and it seemed that atl_SOURCES=src1/foo.c
works fine with this version. So presumably the underscore thing was
introduced between 1.
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 07:43:01PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Based on my recent experience, non-recursive builds are working very
well in the current automake release. Use 'subdir-objects' in
AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS if you want the objects to be placed at the same
relative locat
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, John Darrington wrote:
> Is non-recursive currently supported in automake or is it still in
> development/ideas stage? If it's already working, what version do I
> need, and what documentation exists?
Based on my recent experience, non-recursive builds are working very
well i
Hi folks,
Is non-recursive currently supported in automake or is it still in
development/ideas stage? If it's already working, what version do I
need, and what documentation exists?
I've been trying to follow some threads in this list to gleem an
insight, but I joined late ... so I'd be obliged
51 matches
Mail list logo
