Re: automake 1.7.1 dependency tracking regression?

[Matthias Andree]

On Thu, 28 Nov 2002, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:

> Yes.  I'm quite confused, though, because this is nothing new
> and unrelated to gcc3.  What was the last version that worked
> for you?  I guess it was 1.4.  The new dependency tracking
> scheme has been introduced in 1.5.

I no longer have versions that are that old around.

> You can find an history of dependency tracking in Automake here
> if you are interested:
>    http://sources.redhat.com/automake/dependencies.html

> What you report is something that cannot be handled
> automatically in the new scheme.

Could this be documented in 1.7.2/1.8 automake.info until it's fixed --
for example, the dependencies and BUILT_SOURCES sections were good
places to list this.

> This isn't expected to work either.  
> 
> Instead you should write down the dependency explicitely.  
> I.e., replace 
> 
>   BUILT_SOURCES=bindir.h
> 
> by
> 
>   bindir.$(OBJEXT): bindir.h
>   CLEANFILES = bindir.h

Is this safe to do or will I confuse automake that way? Will the
auto-generated dependencies remain in effect or are they dropped if I
list bindir.$(OBJEXT): explicitly? This particular example does not have
more include files, but what if bindir.c had another #include
"funnyme.h", with funnyme.h being a static file. Would the dependency
tracking notice if funnyme.h changed or would I have to write

bindir.$(OBJEXT): bindir.h funnyme.h

instead?

Thanks in advance!