Thread overview | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
March 12, 2003 smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Hi, I'm having some problems with SMAKE. I have a rather big makefile and SMAKE screws up compilation of one file in that SC doens't include the include files (I can see it in the list file). If I compile the file by hand from the command line everything works fine... strange thing. This is happening while compiling Berkeley-DB 4.1.25 If someone would like to try it I can send over the makefile. Maybe I'm just blind... -- Robert M. Münch IT & Management Freelancer Mobile: +49 (0)177 2452 802 Fax : +49 (0)721 8408 9112 Web : http://www.robertmuench.de |
March 13, 2003 Re: smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert M. Münch | "Robert M. Münch" <robert.muench@robertmuench.de> wrote in message news:b4o485$289l$1@digitaldaemon.com... > Hi, I'm having some problems with SMAKE. I have a rather big makefile and SMAKE screws up compilation of one file in that SC doens't include the include files (I can see it in the list file). If I compile the file by hand > from the command line everything works fine... strange thing. > > This is happening while compiling Berkeley-DB 4.1.25 If someone would like to try it I can send over the makefile. Maybe I'm just blind... The only way to deal with those kinds of problems is to make a backup of the original makefile, and then start chopping off irrelevant parts of the problem makefile until it is reduced to just the syntax that causes the problem. |
March 13, 2003 Re: smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:b4olfd$2mvq$4@digitaldaemon.com... > The only way to deal with those kinds of problems is to make a backup of the > original makefile, and then start chopping off irrelevant parts of the problem makefile until it is reduced to just the syntax that causes the problem. Hi, thanks I try this. I'm really wondering since years why it's mostly impossible to have a simple out-of-the-box makefile setup for bigger source-code libraries. On Linux it's mostly working but on Windows it's really a pain. I'm mostly fighting against such issues than programming problems... Robert |
March 13, 2003 Re: smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert M. Münch | "Robert M. Münch" <robert.muench@robertmuench.de> wrote in message news:b4pcc4$4si$1@digitaldaemon.com... > "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:b4olfd$2mvq$4@digitaldaemon.com... > > The only way to deal with those kinds of problems is to make a backup of > the > > original makefile, and then start chopping off irrelevant parts of the problem makefile until it is reduced to just the syntax that causes the problem. > Hi, thanks I try this. I'm really wondering since years why it's mostly impossible to have a simple out-of-the-box makefile setup for bigger source-code libraries. On Linux it's mostly working but on Windows it's really a pain. I'm mostly fighting against such issues than programming problems... Robert That's because makefile syntax & rules are a giant kludge. And nobody writes makefiles from scratch - they cut & paste & modify from others that someone else managed to get to work. |
March 13, 2003 Re: smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:02:46 -0800, Walter <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote: > The only way to deal with those kinds of problems is to make a backup of the original makefile, and then start chopping off irrelevant parts of the > problem makefile until it is reduced to just the syntax that causes the > problem. I further investigated the problem: 1. SMAKE always fails to compile one file. 2. If I cut & paste the compiler command to the command line it fails too (sometimes). 3. If I change the compile command the file compiles. Thats strange... Sometimes I need to change more, when the file compiles, and I use the original compile line it works too. 4. As posted SMAKE always compiles all files of a target. Is this normal? I though it checks which files changed and only compiles those. -- Robert M. Münch |
March 13, 2003 Re: smake problems | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert M. Münch | "Robert M. Münch" <robert.muench@robertmuench.de> wrote in message news:oprlzmliiyr6w2gz@news.digitalmars.com... > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:02:46 -0800, Walter <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote: > > > The only way to deal with those kinds of problems is to make a backup of > > the original makefile, and then start chopping off irrelevant parts of > > the > > problem makefile until it is reduced to just the syntax that causes the > > problem. > > I further investigated the problem: > > 1. SMAKE always fails to compile one file. > > 2. If I cut & paste the compiler command to the command line it fails too > (sometimes). ? The compiler is pretty deterministic. Something it depends on is changing, like a .h or .sym file. > 3. If I change the compile command the file compiles. Thats strange... Sometimes I need to change more, when the file compiles, and I use the original compile line it works too. I have no idea what is happening. Again, try cutting the makefile down. > 4. As posted SMAKE always compiles all files of a target. Is this normal? I > though it checks which files changed and only compiles those. It depends on how you constructed the dependency list. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation