On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:43:39PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
+> IMO, it's better to use ".PATH:", which makes the problem go away,
+> by making the linker look for the objects where the compiler put
+> them (instead of making the compiler put them where the linker is
+> looking). See previous me
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:43:39PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote:
[...]
> IMO, it's better to use ".PATH:", which makes the problem go away,
> by making the linker look for the objects where the compiler put
> them (instead of making the compiler put them where the linker is
> looking). See previous
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 02:03:35AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> +> Therefore, the simplest solution is to specify -o options everywhere.
> +> I've attached a patch for /usr/share/mk/sys.mk that does this, but
> +> please beware, it might break stuff which *expects* ou
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:50:59PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> +> Because you told make(1) to by virtue of including bsd.prog.mk
> +>
> +> OBJS is derived from SRCS by replacing the extension. If SRCS
> +> contains foo/bar.c, OBJS will contain foo/bar.o...
>
> Yes
On Fri, Apr 04, 2003 at 02:03:35AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote:
+> Therefore, the simplest solution is to specify -o options everywhere.
+> I've attached a patch for /usr/share/mk/sys.mk that does this, but
+> please beware, it might break stuff which *expects* output files to
+> always be put in t
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 01:50:59PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
+> Because you told make(1) to by virtue of including bsd.prog.mk
+>
+> OBJS is derived from SRCS by replacing the extension. If SRCS
+> contains foo/bar.c, OBJS will contain foo/bar.o...
Yes, but take a look on compilation process
On 2003-04-03 at 23:23:00 Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> IMHO make(1) should put .o files in current directory _and_ look for
> them there when producing an executable file. Right?
I think this is more of a gcc/g++ problem/feature. :) The info page
says:
If `-o' is not specified, the default
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 11:23:00PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>
> Could someone please explain such make(1) behaviour:
Because you told make(1) to by virtue of including bsd.prog.mk
OBJS is derived from SRCS by replacing the extension. If SRCS
contains foo/bar.c, OBJS will contain foo/bar
Hello hackers...
Could someone please explain such make(1) behaviour:
% pwd
% /home/nick/src/testdir
% find .
.
./test
./test/tst.c
./Makefile
% cat Makefile
PROG= tst
SRCS= test/tst.c
.include
9 matches
Mail list logo
