[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: How to create header files before make(1) tries to build-headers
From: |
Nicola Pero |
Subject: |
Re: How to create header files before make(1) tries to build-headers |
Date: |
Mon, 6 Mar 2006 06:16:25 +0000 (GMT) |
> > Yes - but I'd suggest we add a before-build-headers though so there
> > is no
> > change in the API. :-)
> >
> > I imagine there is code around that relies on the fact that you can
> > write
> > rules in before-all which expect the headers to have been build
> > already.
>
> Yes, except that it seems more confusing that before-all:: really
> isn't, but is instead before-all-except-before-build-headers:: ;-)
Yes, nothing new here though - in the same way after-all:: really isn't,
since it really is after-all-except-{before-install, install,
after-install}.
I.e. 'all' is a target like anything else, you can have stuff executed
before it (like 'build-headers') or after it (like 'install').
You are suggesting the sequence
before-all
before-build-headers
build-headers
after-build-headers
all
after-all
before-install
install
after-install
I was suggesting the sequence
before-build-headers
build-headers
after-build-headers
before-all
all
after-all
before-install
install
after-install
It's a matter of convention/taste, we can freely choose one or the other
one.
I was suggesting the second one because it is the one that is currently
implemented, and I think it is more consistent (with the exception of
before-build-headers and after-build-headers that don't exist) ... every
target has got its before-xxx and after-xxx rules executed immediately
before and after, which is more consistent and easier to understand - at
least for my taste. ;-)
> Why not just add an
>
> after-build-headers::
>
> rule and make a note that anyone who relies on something done after
> headers are built, change their before-all:: rule to an
> after-build-headers:: rule
Sure - I agree that we should add after-build-headers:: :-)
Thanks