Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com wrote: From: Paul Smith Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 8:57 PM ... ifneq ($(filter else-if,$(.FEATURES)),else-if) $(error Version $(MAKE_VERSION) does not support else-if) endif Are you saying that this statement can be placed outside of a make target recipe command sequence, and would be executed before the target recipe command sequence ? The answer to your question can be found in the GNU make info pages. Or, you could just TRY IT AND GET THE ANSWER INSTANTLY. This is what the new make 4.0 manual says about -trace capability: = ‘--trace’ Show tracing information for make execution. Prints the entire recipe to be executed, even for recipes that are normally silent (due to .SILENT or ‘@’). Also prints the makefile name and line number where the recipe was defined, and information on why the target is being rebuilt. = Again, this is a re-paste of the desired output, which again you deleted in your reply: == $(CC) -c $(CFLAGS) $ -o $@ Make_filename Makefile_Line_Num auto_var_eval auto_var_eval /adir/bdir/cdir/Makefile554.mk 1177 make_debug.c make_debug.o === In GNU make 4.0 the --trace option was introduced. From the NEWS file: * New command line option: --trace enables tracing of targets. When enabled ... Does this trace capability display the full evaluated automatic variables ? Why not include a sample paste of its output. You've been unwilling to given any specific examples of your problems, makefile snippets, or output, and yet you question when other don't provide them? Since you obviously don't have the current version of make installed, why would anyone bother? Philip Guenther Your role is maintenance of the make project. It is not your role to solve other people's engineering problems. When a bug or omission is presented to you, you have at least 3 appropriate response options: 1) we do not think that is an issue that needs to be solved by make, 2) that issue needs to be solved in make, and it is, but in a different way from what may be apparent from the documentation or intuitive, Read the following link URL, chapter, section etc. 3) we do think that issue should solved by make, but it has yet to be implemented. ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 11:05 PM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com wrote: From: Paul Smith Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 8:57 PM ... ifneq ($(filter else-if,$(.FEATURES)),else-if) $(error Version $(MAKE_VERSION) does not support else-if) endif Are you saying that this statement can be placed outside of a make target recipe command sequence, and would be executed before the target recipe command sequence ? The answer to your question can be found in the GNU make info pages. Or, you could just TRY IT AND GET THE ANSWER INSTANTLY. This is what the new make 4.0 manual says about -trace capability: So, you're _not_ going to just try the ifneq()...endif example that Paul provided? Gotcha. = ?--trace? Show tracing information for make execution. Prints the entire recipe to be executed, even for recipes that are normally silent (due to .SILENT or ?@?). Also prints the makefile name and line number where the recipe was defined, and information on why the target is being rebuilt. = Again, this is a re-paste of the desired output, which again you deleted in your reply: No, it doesn't provide output in that format. Your suggested output format can't be unambiguously parsed when the variables contain whitespace, which would make the output much less useful. ... Your role is maintenance of the make project. I'm sorry, but you appear to suffer misconceptions about the project and myself. I have *NO* official role in the project. I'm just someone that uses it and answers some questions on the list. It is not your role to solve other people's engineering problems. Huh. What gave you the role of deciding what other peoples' roles are? When a bug or omission is presented to you, you have at least 3 appropriate response options: 1) we do not think that is an issue that needs to be solved by make, 2) that issue needs to be solved in make, and it is, but in a different way from what may be apparent from the documentation or intuitive, Read the following link URL, chapter, section etc. 3) we do think that issue should solved by make, but it has yet to be implemented. HAHAHHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHA Do you have a contract with me or, for that matter, with the GNU make project which would let you specify that? Heck, do you get to specify that when you complain to Microsoft about bugs in their tools? (There are plenty of courteous people that ask questions on this list. I shouldn't stop giving my minimal help in answering their questions just because one person stomps in complaining that we must answer questions in the way he demands.) Philip ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com wrote:
First, let me request that you include the question posed to you,
in your Reply responses in this email sequence.
How about you stop top-posting and instead reply inline?
1) I think my question was explicit.
A method for an existing Makefile to test for .FEATURES capabilities
when it is downloaded to a random linux or Windows make environment
and existed.
sigh That wasn't the question you originally asked. To quote your
original query about .FEATURES:
As a separate related issue,
I was try to echo the .FEATURES information, since one of the its it claims
to display
mentions its Else If capabilities.
However, every time I tried to echo the data I received a syntax error.
What would be an example of a Makefile contents which would display
the .FEATURES information ?
The example that Paul gave answers that original question:
all:
echo ${.FEATURES}
So now you have a new question
The Makefile itself when e.g make target is selected, should be
able to precede execution of any target with a check of .FEATURES
to verify the make environment into which it is downloaded.
Give an example of .FEATURES display/echo in an existing Makefile.,
both v 3.80 and 4.00 .
2) Also, please answer the other question posed:
---
I also want to know if there is a debug mode within make
in which the Makefile filename and Line Number
(some Makefiles are huge and distributed over several subordinate Makefiles)
is matched to each automatic variable evaluation within a Target evaluation.
---
If either of these make capabilities are not possible currently,
then that is a case for implementation in Make version 4.1 .
-Original Message- From: Paul Smith
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 9:35 AM
To: Mark Brown
Cc: bug-make@gnu.org
Subject: Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
On Sun, 2014-01-26 at 16:22 -0800, Mark Brown wrote:
That example method is a device to perform this .FEATURES test
without inserting it into an existing Makefile.
The syntax errors I was seeing were occurring when attempting to insert
this
test into an existing Makefile, full of Targets and command sequences.
Well, since you've provided no details about exactly what you tried and
what errors you received, or even details about exactly what you're
trying to do, there's not much else we can say. You said echo the
data, and I showed an example of echoing the data. If that's not what
you want, you need to give more information.
==re-pasted text of the question posed=
That example method is a device to perform this .FEATURES test
without inserting it into an existing Makefile.
The syntax errors I was seeing were occurring when attempting to insert this
test
into an existing Makefile, full of Targets and command sequences.
If this feature is used it would be at the top of an existing Makefile,
before any targets
are evaluated.
I also want to know if there is a debug mode within make
in which the Makefile filename and Line Number
(some Makefiles are huge and distributed over several subordinate Makefiles)
is matched to each automatic variable evaluation within a Target evaluation.
=
___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
(Dang it: gmail treats control-enter as send...)
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Philip Guenther guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com wrote:
First, let me request that you include the question posed to you,
in your Reply responses in this email sequence.
How about you stop top-posting and instead reply inline?
1) I think my question was explicit.
A method for an existing Makefile to test for .FEATURES capabilities
when it is downloaded to a random linux or Windows make environment
and existed.
sigh That wasn't the question you originally asked. To quote your
original query about .FEATURES:
As a separate related issue,
I was try to echo the .FEATURES information, since one of the its it claims
to display
mentions its Else If capabilities.
However, every time I tried to echo the data I received a syntax error.
What would be an example of a Makefile contents which would display
the .FEATURES information ?
The example that Paul gave answers that original question:
all:
echo ${.FEATURES}
So now you have a new question
The Makefile itself when e.g make target is selected, should be
able to precede execution of any target with a check of .FEATURES
to verify the make environment into which it is downloaded.
Give an example of .FEATURES display/echo in an existing Makefile.,
both v 3.80 and 4.00 .
This is where Paul question of what did you already try? comes in.
Rather than give you a fish, it would be better to teach you how to
fish; seeing what you tried would let us correct whatever
misunderstanding caused the syntax errors you got.
Or you could search the archives for examples, if you really don't
want to understand.
2) Also, please answer the other question posed:
Hmm, how much are you paying for these answers? Oh right, nothing...
---
I also want to know if there is a debug mode within make
in which the Makefile filename and Line Number
(some Makefiles are huge and distributed over several subordinate Makefiles)
is matched to each automatic variable evaluation within a Target evaluation.
---
Since you don't say what debug output you've already looked at, I'll
just suggest two possibilities
1) make -pq and examine the dumped output, which gives file and line
number for all commands
2) check out the remake project. http://bashdb.sourceforge.net/remake/
If either of these make capabilities are not possible currently,
then that is a case for implementation in Make version 4.1 .
You didn't describe the problem that you're trying to solve; how do
you know that data would solve it? Why *only* automatic variables?
If there are several levels of variable expansion involved, what
should the output look like?
Philip Guenther
___
Bug-make mailing list
Bug-make@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
-Original Message-
From: Philip Guenther
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 1:34 PM
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Paul Smith ; bug-make
Subject: Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
(Dang it: gmail treats control-enter as send...)
[Gmail is overrated. When I saw I could not free create folders and move
messages
between them, I bailed on Gmail.]
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Philip Guenther guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com
wrote:
First, let me request that you include the question posed to you,
in your Reply responses in this email sequence.
How about you stop top-posting and instead reply inline?
Ok.
1) I think my question was explicit.
A method for an existing Makefile to test for .FEATURES capabilities
when it is downloaded to a random linux or Windows make environment
and existed.
sigh That wasn't the question you originally asked. To quote your
original query about .FEATURES:
As a separate related issue,
I was try to echo the .FEATURES information, since one of the its it
claims to display
mentions its Else If capabilities.
However, every time I tried to echo the data I received a syntax error.
What would be an example of a Makefile contents which would display
the .FEATURES information ?
Makefile contents is operative here.
The example that Paul gave answers that original question:
all:
echo ${.FEATURES}
So now you have a new question
The Makefile itself when e.g make target is selected, should be
able to precede execution of any target with a check of .FEATURES
to verify the make environment into which it is downloaded.
Give an example of .FEATURES display/echo in an existing Makefile.,
both v 3.80 and 4.00 .
This is where Paul question of what did you already try? comes in.
Rather than give you a fish, it would be better to teach you how to
fish; seeing what you tried would let us correct whatever
misunderstanding caused the syntax errors you got.
Or you could search the archives for examples, if you really don't
want to understand.
I tried -d (which equates to turning on all debug flags)
and did not find the trace of a source file or the corresponding output file
which I could see being generated when I deleted the output file each time.
The particular build I performed generated a 3.2 GBytes file which had to
be split into 5 portions to search each one.
2) Also, please answer the other question posed:
Hmm, how much are you paying for these answers? Oh right, nothing...
I am presenting features that are needed in the Make project for general
usage.
---
I also want to know if there is a debug mode within make
in which the Makefile filename and Line Number
(some Makefiles are huge and distributed over several subordinate
Makefiles)
is matched to each automatic variable evaluation within a Target
evaluation.
---
Since you don't say what debug output you've already looked at, I'll
just suggest two possibilities
1) make -pq and examine the dumped output, which gives file and line
number for all commands
2) check out the remake project. http://bashdb.sourceforge.net/remake/
Make documentation indicates that -d would include -p and -q .
However, the specific information I am looking for should be readily
available.
i.e. make -h should highlight the flag which delivers the result I have
described.
$(CC) -c $(CFLAGS) $ -o $@
Make_filename Makefile_Line_Num
auto_var_eval auto_var_eval
/adir/bdir/cdir/Makefile554.mk1177
make_debug.c make_debug.o
...
...
The current directory would be implied by the Makefile full pathname.
If either of these make capabilities are not possible currently,
then that is a case for implementation in Make version 4.1 .
You didn't describe the problem that you're trying to solve; how do
you know that data would solve it? Why *only* automatic variables?
If there are several levels of variable expansion involved, what
should the output look like?
Philip Guenther
Whenever I use Make on an existing big project,
the information about where a particular source file is compiled
is the main thing I want to know.
Usually, this affects how additional files could be added to the executable
or library
related to a particular file.
As mentioned, I searched the whole -d output and did not see particular .c
sources,
for which the .o or .so I knew were being generated by operation of make.
Automatic variable resolution has an eventual end and I am sure the make
parser is aware
when there are no more variable fields within a token string, .
At that point, especially for automatic variables like ‘$@’ and ‘$’ ,
the evaluated result should be displayed along with the full pathname of the
current Makefile
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
-Original Message-
From: Philip Guenther
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2014 1:34 PM
To: Mark Brown
Cc: Paul Smith ; bug-make
Subject: Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
(Dang it: gmail treats control-enter as send...)
[Gmail is overrated. When I saw I could not free create folders and move
messages
between them, I bailed on Gmail.]
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, Philip Guenther guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Mark Brown mkbrown_...@hotmail.com
wrote:
First, let me request that you include the question posed to you,
in your Reply responses in this email sequence.
How about you stop top-posting and instead reply inline?
Ok.
1) I think my question was explicit.
A method for an existing Makefile to test for .FEATURES capabilities
when it is downloaded to a random linux or Windows make environment
and existed.
sigh That wasn't the question you originally asked. To quote your
original query about .FEATURES:
As a separate related issue,
I was try to echo the .FEATURES information, since one of the its it
claims to display
mentions its Else If capabilities.
However, every time I tried to echo the data I received a syntax error.
What would be an example of a Makefile contents which would display
the .FEATURES information ?
Makefile contents is operative here.
The example that Paul gave answers that original question:
all:
echo ${.FEATURES}
Looks like you are saying here that such a test to inhibit all operations by
this Makefile
would have to be implemented on a Target by Target basis.
Sometimes there are scores of Targets in a Makefile or distributed Makefile,
within each of which this test would have to be performed.
So now you have a new question
The Makefile itself when e.g make target is selected, should be
able to precede execution of any target with a check of .FEATURES
to verify the make environment into which it is downloaded.
Give an example of .FEATURES display/echo in an existing Makefile.,
both v 3.80 and 4.00 .
This is where Paul question of what did you already try? comes in.
Rather than give you a fish, it would be better to teach you how to
fish; seeing what you tried would let us correct whatever
misunderstanding caused the syntax errors you got.
Or you could search the archives for examples, if you really don't
want to understand.
I tried -d (which equates to turning on all debug flags)
and did not find the trace of a source file or the corresponding output file
which I could see being generated when I deleted the output file each time.
The particular build I performed generated a 3.2 GBytes file which had to
be split into 5 portions to search each one.
2) Also, please answer the other question posed:
Hmm, how much are you paying for these answers? Oh right, nothing...
I am presenting features that are needed in the Make project for general
usage.
---
I also want to know if there is a debug mode within make
in which the Makefile filename and Line Number
(some Makefiles are huge and distributed over several subordinate
Makefiles)
is matched to each automatic variable evaluation within a Target
evaluation.
---
Since you don't say what debug output you've already looked at, I'll
just suggest two possibilities
1) make -pq and examine the dumped output, which gives file and line
number for all commands
2) check out the remake project. http://bashdb.sourceforge.net/remake/
Make documentation indicates that -d would include -p and -q .
However, the specific information I am looking for should be readily
available.
i.e. make -h should highlight the flag which delivers the result I have
described.
$(CC) -c $(CFLAGS) $ -o $@
Make_filename Makefile_Line_Num
auto_var_eval auto_var_eval
/adir/bdir/cdir/Makefile554.mk1177
make_debug.c make_debug.o
...
...
The current directory would be implied by the Makefile full pathname.
If either of these make capabilities are not possible currently,
then that is a case for implementation in Make version 4.1 .
You didn't describe the problem that you're trying to solve; how do
you know that data would solve it? Why *only* automatic variables?
If there are several levels of variable expansion involved, what
should the output look like?
Philip Guenther
Whenever I use Make on an existing big project,
the information about where a particular source file is compiled
is the main thing I want to know.
Usually, this affects how additional files could be added to the executable
or library
related to a particular file.
As mentioned, I searched the whole -d output and did not see particular .c
sources,
for which the .o or .so I knew were being generated by operation of make.
Automatic variable resolution has an eventual end
win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
I was able to compile the make 4.0 source code downloaded from the gnu make site using Visual C++ 2005 under Windows 7 64 (generated 0 errors, 259 warnings) but executing the resulting make command file from the Windows 7 DOS Command Prompt yields a series of warnings/errors: == process_begin: CreateProcess(NULL, uname, ...) failed. make: process_begin: CreateProcess(NULL, uname -a, ...) failed. make: process_begin: CreateProcess(NULL, cygpath C:\zzz_13.12.1_general\tools, ...) failed. make: process_begin: CreateProcess(NULL, pwd, ...) failed. = Is the resulting file supposed to executed under Cygwin ? Aeneas ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code
Title: Re: win32 compilation of make 4.0 source code Hello, Mark. Monday, January 13, 2014, 17:57:20 you wrote: Is the resulting file supposed to executed under Cygwin ? No. If you build Make natively for Windows, this results in native Windows version. Cygwin is actually quite a different story. Cygwin is not really Windows. Perhaps you heard the word "personalities". Windows NT in the beginning was supposed to have multiple "personalities" (read: APIs) to be compatible (sometimes even on binary level) with different OSes. These personalities included WinAPI (actually old 9x API), OS/2 (binary-compatible) and UNIX (only source-compatible because still relied on PE format, not ELF). With time Microsoft decided to phase our everything except WinAPI. Cygwin is actually modern, opensource version of UNIX personality. When you build a program for Cygwin, you use Cygwin compilers, not Visual Studio or MinGW. Cygwin appears to be a different platform with a different runtime. You cannot compile for Cygwin using Visual Studio (well, in theory you can, given you supply a set of proper includes and libraries), but i don't know about practical attempts to do that. -- , Pavel mailto:pavel_fe...@mail.ru ___ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
