%% Jonathan Baccash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
jb> Ok, in my attempt to dumb down the example, I guess I dumbed it down a
jb> bit too much.... In reality, the command I'm running is lib.exe, which
jb> comes with the visual studio compiler. When I run lib /DEF:my.def,
jb> the outputs created are my.exp and my.lib. Some commands depend on
jb> my.exp, and others on my.lib.
jb> So the actual makefile would be more like
jb> my.dll: my.exp my.obj
jb> link /DLL $^
jb> my.exp: my.lib
jb> my.lib: my.def
jb> lib /DEF:my.def
You should consider writing this with pattern rules, like:
my.dll: my.exp my.obj
...
%.exp %.lib : %.def
...
That will do what you want.
jb> I don't think I'm really hiding anything from make here. I told
jb> make that to update my.exp, it needs to update my.lib. Ok, it did
jb> that, and then it thought my.exp was not newer than my.dll.
Make knows that it didn't run any rules, so it "knows" that my.exp could
not have been updated. In fact, the "my.exp: my.lib" statement is not a
full rule: it's just a prerequisite declaration.
If you want make to re-check whether my.exp was actually updated you
have to give it a rule, even if it's empty:
my.exp: my.lib
@:
or whatever.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://make.paulandlesley.org
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
_______________________________________________
Help-make mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
