Re: Desired feature
On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 13:24:11 -0600 (CST), Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: It would be useful if Automake supported a set of options (e.g. LDFLAGS) which are applied only when building libraries or when building programs. It is excessively painful to have to add per-target _LDFLAGS options. Perhaps there should be both 'LT' and non-'LT' macro versions. Certainly this can be accomplished by overriding Automake's standard LINK and COMPILE definitions, but overriding standard definitions is risky. Seconded! It would be great to have `LT_LDFLAGS = -module', rather than 15 lines of `foo_LDFLAGS = -module' in a future m4 Makefile.am :-) Cheers, Gary. -- Gary V. Vaughan ())_. [EMAIL PROTECTED],gnu.org} Research Scientist ( '/ http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
Re: Desired feature
On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:49:04AM +, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: It would be great to have `LT_LDFLAGS = -module', rather than 15 lines of `foo_LDFLAGS = -module' in a future m4 Makefile.am :-) Regarding M4: last time I checked you had a directory dedicated to modules. Why don't you simply use AM_LDFLAGS = -module in this directory? More generally I think adding an LT_LDFLAGS variable is not a solution, because some day Bob will come and say Now I need a global LDFLAGS variable for standard libtool libraries, and another different LDFLAGS for libtool modules; not being able to distinguish these two sets of libraries is an extremely annoying (magnitude 42 on Richter's scale) misfeature of Automake. Maybe we need a way to apply flags to groups of files, and tying flags to dir_PRIMARY variables (as in bin_PROGRAMS_LDFLAGS) would be an option.
Re: Desired feature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote: | On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 08:49:04AM +, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: | |It would be great to have `LT_LDFLAGS = -module', rather than 15 lines of |`foo_LDFLAGS = -module' in a future m4 Makefile.am :-) | | | Regarding M4: last time I checked you had a directory dedicated to | modules. Why don't you simply use AM_LDFLAGS = -module in this | directory? That's how I do it at the moment, but I want to convert to a non-recursive make, and then the AM_LDFLAGS will apply to the other directories as well. | More generally I think adding an LT_LDFLAGS variable is not a | solution, because some day Bob will come and say Now I need a global | LDFLAGS variable for standard libtool libraries, and another different | LDFLAGS for libtool modules; not being able to distinguish these two | sets of libraries is an extremely annoying (magnitude 42 on Richter's | scale) misfeature of Automake. :-D | Maybe we need a way to apply flags to groups of files, and tying flags | to dir_PRIMARY variables (as in bin_PROGRAMS_LDFLAGS) would be an | option. Agreed. That is definitely a better solution, I like it a lot :-) Actually, now that you point it out, I would hit that problem myself, since m4 has normal _LTLIBRARIES, noinst_LTLIBRARIES and modules. I would be happy if I could do this: ~AM_LDFLAGS = everything gets these ~noinst_LTLIBRARIES_LDFLAGS = these are for convenience libs ~lib_LTLIBRARIES_LDFLAGS = these are for other libtool libs ~libm4_la_LDFLAGS = but I can override non module libs individually That is, I think target specific flags should override PRIMARY group flags, not be in addition to them. Cheers, Gary. - -- Gary V. Vaughan ())_. [EMAIL PROTECTED],gnu.org} Research Scientist ( '/ http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/zxnCFRMICSmD1gYRAvlQAKCehVcMvZ0W71Wk3FIFHTDgca7LvACgqnMV AimUpITNy5koaMWEPe+rZLc= =EmD/ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Desired feature
On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: Actually, now that you point it out, I would hit that problem myself, since m4 has normal _LTLIBRARIES, noinst_LTLIBRARIES and modules. I would be happy if I could do this: ~AM_LDFLAGS = everything gets these ~noinst_LTLIBRARIES_LDFLAGS = these are for convenience libs ~lib_LTLIBRARIES_LDFLAGS = these are for other libtool libs ~libm4_la_LDFLAGS = but I can override non module libs individually That is, I think target specific flags should override PRIMARY group flags, not be in addition to them. I tend to disagree with you on this point. I will agree if the system has three levels plus a way to provide overrides. For example, if the user configures like ./configure LDFLAGS=-lbar then I believe that this user-requested value should be applied to all targets. Likewise, the configure script may want to contribute some common LDFLAGS parameters. Automake should support o inheritance of standard configure flags o flags common across all targets o additional flags common to a grouping of targets o additional flags specific to just one target o a way to override common flags at any level. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
Re: Desired feature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bob Friesenhahn wrote: | Automake should support | | o inheritance of standard configure flags LDFLAGS | o flags common across all targets AM_LDFLAGS | o additional flags common to a grouping of targets dir_PRIMARY_LDFLAGS | o additional flags specific to just one target target_LDFLAGS | o a way to override common flags at any level. overriding is the default for target_LDFLAGS vs dir_PRIMARY_LDFLAGS, which you can bypass with `target_LDFLAGS = $(dir_PRIMARY_LDFLAGS) -foo'. I can't think of a nice syntax where addition is the default, and overriding must be specified. Cheers, Gary. - -- Gary V. Vaughan ())_. [EMAIL PROTECTED],gnu.org} Research Scientist ( '/ http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE/z2DnFRMICSmD1gYRAnKgAKCtElBkOY1XV19C/SlO0T+DgFny2gCcCSEB km/SpMwrWm/xxMIThLziFcQ= =EUAg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Desired feature
Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: I would be happy if I could do this: I tend to disagree with you on this point. I will agree if the system has three levels plus a way to provide overrides.. Automake should support o inheritance of standard configure flags o flags common across all targets o additional flags common to a grouping of targets o additional flags specific to just one target o a way to override common flags at any level. The best is to be able to easily express which sets of command options should be applied to various build rules, beit for compile, link or any other build rule. Part of the problem is that the expressiveness of pseudo-make variable names is rather constrained. Anyway, the add to higher level flag lists versus replace higher level flag lists can be solved most easily by always replacing, but allowing the replacement to specify which of the higher level flags to incorporate. e.g. module_group_tool_FLAGS = $(tool_FLAGS) -x YYY would say to ignore $(group_tool_FLAGS) when applying the tool tool to the module module for the group thing. For the C compiler, you might spell tool_FLAGS as CFLAGS for historical purposes and spell as AM_CFLAGS at the top. So, for another example: mumble_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -specific-for-mumble-modules for specifying all the mumble module compiles that do not have a $(mod_mumble_CFLAGS) set. Please, forget the noinst_LTLIBRARIES_LDFLAGS stuff -- it is too obtuse for the non-automake junkies. Me. :-) Just use mumble_LDFLAGS, stumble_LDFLAGS and grumble_LDFLAGS. If the mumble, stumble and grumble libraries happen to be convenience libraries, then great. If you want them to be the same, then set them all to $(WHATEVER) and tell your clients that adding ``WHATEVER=else'' on the make line will change LD flags for the mumble, stumble and grumble libraries. The real deal is that the scheme needs an extremely high degree of consistency between various build tools and it needs to be as simple to use as absolutely possible. Automake is already too complicated. :) Cheers - Bruce
Desired feature
It would be useful if Automake supported a set of options (e.g. LDFLAGS) which are applied only when building libraries or when building programs. It is excessively painful to have to add per-target _LDFLAGS options. Perhaps there should be both 'LT' and non-'LT' macro versions. Certainly this can be accomplished by overriding Automake's standard LINK and COMPILE definitions, but overriding standard definitions is risky. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
