[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151112215232.GC3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 16:52:32 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Support for out-of-tree build
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:10:24PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> [2015-11-12 15:30:48 -0500]:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:17:05PM +0000, Petr Hosek wrote:
> > > There is one other issue with the VPATH solution which I just realized
> > > while trying to make changes to the original patch: the order-only
> > > dependencies don't work with VPATH because the directories already exist
> > > the source directory, so we'd need to use the solution with .dirstamps.
> >
> > Alternatively, configure could be responsible for making the skeleton
> > tree at the same time it puts a Makefile in the build dir. I don't
> > know if I like this approach but it's achievable with a simple find
> > command.
> >
>
> that only works if no new source directories are added after configure.
Yes. For active development where you don't want to re-run configure
all the time that could be a pain. I was thinking more just for
automated builds.
> > I'm still uncertain which approach (VPATH or non-VPATH) we should
> > take, so I'm trying to reason through the consequences of both.
> >
>
> depends on if we change the src/dir/arch layout and sub handling.
>
> if we dont change anything then i think vpath with dirstamps is
> the cleanest solution.
I don't like it a lot, but it's not horrible, and it does solve the
problem with supporting new dirs.
> it might be worth looking at how well make handles generated rules
> with foreach (instead of %.o patterns), then we can use whatever
> directory layout and precedence rules.
I think this is very slow. The stuff I added for .sub files was a big
performance regression.
What if we put the *.o files for arch asm in the arch dirs rather than
in the main src dirs. Is there some clean way we could write a rule to
remove the base .o files from OBJS when the arch-specific .o files are
there?
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
