[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: make problem with multiple character matching (%) operator
From: |
James . Potts |
Subject: |
Re: make problem with multiple character matching (%) operator |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Jan 2002 09:45:38 -0600 |
Are you saying that VPATH can not be used to find intermediate targets, such as
objects built by the compiler?
Thanks for your help.
Jim Potts - Reuters
"Paul D.
Smith" To: Crni Gorac <address@hidden>
<address@hidden cc: address@hidden
rg> Subject: Re: make problem with
multiple character matching (%)
Sent by: operator
help-make-adm Header: Internal Use Only
address@hidden
01/11/2002
03:37 PM
Please
respond to
"Paul D.
Smith"
%% Crni Gorac <address@hidden> writes:
cg> Project foo has following directory hierarchy:
cg> foo
cg> |-- Makefile
cg> |-- ab
cg> | `-- foo.a
cg> `-- c
cg> File foo/ab/foo.b should be generated from
cg> foo/ab/foo.a and then file foo/c/foo.c from
cg> foo/ab/foo.b. Following Makefile is used:
cg> ABDIR = ab
cg> CDIR = c
cg> VPATH = $(ABDIR)
cg> Where I am wrong? Why it is not possible for make to accomplish
cg> two successive multiple character matching and conclude that it
cg> should first generate .b file, then .c file?
That's not the problem. The problem is you're misusing VPATH.
VPATH is designed to find _sources_. It cannot be used to find
_targets_. It won't work to use it like that.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Smith <address@hidden> Find some GNU make tips at:
http://www.gnu.org http://www.paulandlesley.org/gmake/
"Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
_______________________________________________
Help-make mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-make
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.