[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Where to generate .lo files ?

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Where to generate .lo files ?
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:15:23 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Michel Briand wrote on Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 10:33:34AM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> - Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:06:52 +0100
> >
> >If you're using Automake, then you're probably looking for the Automake
> >option subdir-objects, which causes objects to put in directories along
> >the subdir of the source files provided.

> I put the sub-objects into my AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE. It works like you
> explained. Thanks. But why does it's not the default behavior ?

Oh, the reason for that is probably portability issues in tools from
years ago.  I can only speculate, but old make implementations probably
had less than spectacular support for the VPATH feature with files that
have directory components.  Solaris 2.6 make for example is quite broken
that way.  Another issue is that more compilers existed which did not
support being passed both -c and -o, thus having the object file placed
in the current directory was in a sense "more natural".

> Furthermore I noted that .o files are twice for one source file:

Well, that is "normal" for objects that are being put into libraries:
one object is compiled with position-independent code, one without.
Jan already noted this.

It shouldn't happen for objects that only end up in programs though.
For example, with this:

bin_PROGRAMS = foo
foo_SOURCES = foo.c
libbar_la_SOURCES = bar.c

only bar.c will be compiled twice, but not foo.c.

With convenience archives, objects are created twice because they may
end up being incorporated into libraries later.

Hope that helps.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]