On 12/22/2016 10:45 PM, Fecher, Gerhard wrote: > Personally I like more to tell make which files I like to have compiled > instead of using an automatic > search and the makefile decides which ones I like to have compiled, > but maybe I am just a little bit too old fashioned.
Well, the rule I quoted just says how to build a file.o from file.f or file.F. The list of object files is defined like this OBJS = $(filter-out $(R_OBJS) $(RC_OBJS), \ $(patsubst %.F, %.o, $(wildcard *.F)) \ $(patsubst %.f, %.o, $(wildcard *.f))) I.e., converted from all Fortran source files in the directory. Eventually, of them will be compiled because the targets depend on them. I don't know if this is explicit enough for you. But if you think that the Makefile is overly complicated for building all of 3 objects (5 in SRC_w2w/), I can agree with that. Most of the Makefile comes from when most procedures had their own little source file. These days, the above could read OBJS = $(filter-out $(R_OBJS) $(RC_OBJS), modules.o modules_rc.ow wplot.o) or even just OBJS = modules.o (OBJS is only supposed to contain those objects that are the same for the real and complex versions.) Other than that, a lot of the structure of the Makefile comes from the desire to respect certain conventions of the Wien2k Makefiles, and to have something that works for SRC_w2w/ and SRC_wplot/ with minimal changes. Superficial differences have accumulated, but at the core, the differences reflect: the different names of the executables; different dependencies among objects; and the need in SRC_wplot/ to link to some objects from SRC_w2w/. Elias
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Wien mailing list Wien@zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at http://zeus.theochem.tuwien.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/wien SEARCH the MAILING-LIST at: http://firstname.lastname@example.org/index.html