[bug #30653] intermediate files incorrectly pruned in parallel builds

[Jeremy Devenport]

URL:
  

 Summary: intermediate files incorrectly pruned in parallel
builds
 Project: make
Submitted by: jeremyd
Submitted on: Thu 05 Aug 2010 01:24:56 AM GMT
Severity: 3 - Normal
  Item Group: Bug
  Status: None
 Privacy: Public
 Assigned to: None
 Open/Closed: Open
 Discussion Lock: Any
   Component Version: CVS
Operating System: Any
   Fixed Release: None
   Triage Status: None

___

Details:

make 3.82 sometimes fails to make intermediate (or secondary) files during
parallel builds. I see that there are a couple bug reports with similar titles
but this particular bug seems to have been introduced in 3.82 (and is still
present in CVS).

I'm attaching a patch that adds a test that demonstrates the bug along with a
fix that seems to work. I'm not very familiar with the code so I'm not sure
that my fix doesn't break something else.



___

File Attachments:


---
Date: Thu 05 Aug 2010 01:24:56 AM GMT  Name:
make-intermediate-parallel-bug.patch  Size: 2kB   By: jeremyd



___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: GNU make distribution with proprietary products

[tom honermann]

On 8/4/2010 2:26 PM, Philip Guenther wrote:

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:27 PM, tom honermann  wrote:
  

On 8/4/2010 11:25 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:


There are free software license that are not GPL, for example the
modified BSD license.  Pointing you to non-free software would be
wrong, since such software subjugates your rights as a computer user.
  

Ah, yes, if only the world were that simple.  Alas, the world consists of
many software producers that do not share this view, but still function in
accordance with the laws of their respective governments.  I'm
attempting to identify (at least) one of them.



The tone of these messages seem...unfriendly to the practice.  I've
seen software that does what you describe, but I see no reason to
identify them to be pilloried for it.

What problem are you trying to solve?


Philip Guenther
  
I have no reason or desire to cast judgment on anyone complying with 
legal requirements.  I've been
trying to choose my words carefully to avoid portraying in either a 
positive or negative light, the
practice of aggregating free and proprietary software.  I guess I have 
not been fully successful

at that...

I have a need to distribute a build system with a proprietary product.  
I have no influence over the
licensing of the proprietary product.  I do have influence over the 
design of the build system and
I would like that build system to be based on GNU make.  For ease of 
use, I would like to
distribute GNU make with the proprietary product so that our users do 
not have to acquire a
copy of GNU make on their own.  This puts us in the position of needing 
to distribute a GPL'd
product with our proprietary product - something which I need approval 
from our legal department

to do.

I am not seeking legal advice, comments about the legality or ethicality 
of such aggregated works,
or comments regarding requirements of the GPL licenses.  I'm looking for 
companies that are
distributing such aggregated works as examples I can use to show that 
such aggregation is being
done by other companies without (presumably) legal repercussions (which 
assumes that the
copyright holders are aware of the aggregated work and believe that the 
use does not infringe

on the requirements of the GPL)

Your point is well taken Philip.  If you trust that I have no desire to 
deride those engaging in this
practice, a private email would be appreciated.  Otherwise, I 
respectfully acknowledge your

(and anyone else's) desire not to name names either publicly or privately.

Tom.

___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: GNU make distribution with proprietary products

[Philip Guenther]

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:27 PM, tom honermann  wrote:
> On 8/4/2010 11:25 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>> There are free software license that are not GPL, for example the
>> modified BSD license.  Pointing you to non-free software would be
>> wrong, since such software subjugates your rights as a computer user.
>
> Ah, yes, if only the world were that simple.  Alas, the world consists of
> many software producers that do not share this view, but still function in
> accordance with the laws of their respective governments.  I'm
> attempting to identify (at least) one of them.

The tone of these messages seem...unfriendly to the practice.  I've
seen software that does what you describe, but I see no reason to
identify them to be pilloried for it.

What problem are you trying to solve?


Philip Guenther

___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: GNU make distribution with proprietary products

[tom honermann]

On 8/4/2010 11:25 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

There are free software license that are not GPL, for example the
modified BSD license.  Pointing you to non-free software would be
wrong, since such software subjugates your rights as a computer user.
  
Ah, yes, if only the world were that simple.  Alas, the world consists 
of many software
producers that do not share this view, but still function in accordance 
with the laws of their

respective governments.  I'm attempting to identify (at least) one of them.

___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

[Eric Melski]

Hambridge, Philip J (ODP) wrote:

I've not been following this thread too closely, but this may be
relevant:
http://www.cmcrossroads.com/ask-mr-make/12909-descrambling-parallel-build-logs



I wrote the linked article; for those not interested in reading it, the 
strategy described there is the same as that used by the talon shell 
wrapper described elsewhere in this thread.


Best regards,

Eric Melski
Architect
Electric Cloud, Inc.
http://blog.electric-cloud.com/




___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

Re: GNU make distribution with proprietary products

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   I'm interested in finding some examples of proprietary software
   products (ie, non-GPL licensed) that distribute a copy of GNU make
   (preferably a binary, with or without changes to the GNU make
   source code) with the product.  If you are aware of such a product,
   I would appreciate a reply with the product name and vendor.  Thank
   you in advance.

There are free software license that are not GPL, for example the
modified BSD license.  Pointing you to non-free software would be
wrong, since such software subjugates your rights as a computer user.

___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

GNU make distribution with proprietary products

[tom honermann]

I'm a little bit off-topic with this email, please forgive me...

I'm interested in finding some examples of proprietary software products
(ie, non-GPL licensed) that distribute a copy of GNU make (preferably a
binary, with or without changes to the GNU make source code) with the
product.  If you are aware of such a product, I would appreciate a reply
with the product name and vendor.  Thank you in advance.

Tom.


___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

[bug #30323] No path in MAKE_COMMAND (with fix)

[anonymous]

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #30323 (project make):

Hi Eli,

> Sorry, I don't follow. I'm not even sure we are talking about the same
thing, so let's step back for a moment and see that we understand each other.


Ful ACK.

> This code's sole purpose is to define the value of $MAKE such that it will
cause the same executable to be invoked by sub-Make's. There's no other
purpose here. Agreed? 

ACK.

> Next, let's forget about the comment, it is only correct for Posix
platforms. Let's talk only about what the code actually does on Windows. Okay?


ACK.

> Now, the code in question, in its WINDOWS32 branch, simply mirrors all
backslashes to forward slashes (except in a couple of weirdo cases, which we
will ignore for the moment). Unlike the Posix branch, this code does NOT
prepend the current directory to the value of argv[0]. Do you agree? 

NACK. The line

argv[0] = xstrdup(w32ify(argv[0],1));

calls w32ify() with the second parameter being 1 causing w32ify() to call
_fullpath().

Then _fullpath() calls GetFullPathName() which is described as:
"merges the name of the current drive and directory with a specified file
name to determine the full path and file name of a specified file."

> Now, if you agree with all of the above, please describe a use-case where
the result of this code will be a value of $MAKE which could potentially
invoke a different executable in a sub-Make. 

1. Have make.exe in the current directory (and not in the PATH).
2. Have a subdirectory 'subdir'.
3. Have a Makefile with the following content:

all:
cd subdir && $(MAKE)

4. Use cmd.exe and enter 'make'.

You'll get:

cd subdir && make
make: not found
make: *** [all] Error 127

Oliver Schmidt - oliv.schmidt(at)sap.com

___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/


___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make

RE: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

[Hambridge, Philip J (ODP)]

I've not been following this thread too closely, but this may be
relevant:
http://www.cmcrossroads.com/ask-mr-make/12909-descrambling-parallel-buil
d-logs

One aspect to this issue is that the compiler error messages appear
'mis-aligned' against the sources. I've worked around this for one build
system I maintain by making it automatically kick off another serial
build when a parallel build completes with errors. (This is fairly easy
as GNU make gets called from a front-end script that presents a simpler
interface to developers.) That way, the end result is a build transcript
that clearly shows the errors aligned with the source.

Regards,

Philip.

-Original Message-
From: Chiheng Xu [mailto:chiheng...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 30 July 2010 03:00
To: bug-make@gnu.org
Subject: [RFC]serialize the output of parallel make?

As parallel make are becoming more and more popular,  can make
serialize the output of parallel make?

Make can redirect every parallelly issued shell's output to an
temporary file,  and output the stored output serially, as if in a
serial make.

-- 
Chiheng Xu
Wuhan,China



___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make