Hello all
Given the recent problems on Mac OS X with regard to "make install" and
since Eric Mitchell's initial work on the new Makefile system seems to
use GNU make (or gmake), then I propose we use GNU make for the new
Makefile system. GNU make has many features not found in other Make
commands which would be very useful to us.
The only downside to this is that we must have users install gmake
before they will be able to compile Grass. However, other Open Source
software requires gmake (postgreSQL and libgdal are a couple) and even
the SGI employee responsible for their freeware site recommends using it
rather than their own Make command. Thus, it appears that GNU make is
fairly popular.
What do people think?
--
Sincerely,
Jazzman (a.k.a. Justin Hickey) e-mail: jhickey@hpcc.nectec.or.th
High Performance Computing Center
National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC)
Bangkok, Thailand
People who think they know everything are very irritating to those
of us who do. ---Anonymous
Jazz and Trek Rule!!!
----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 11:27:34AM +0700, Justin Hickey wrote:
Hello all
Given the recent problems on Mac OS X with regard to "make install" and
since Eric Mitchell's initial work on the new Makefile system seems to
use GNU make (or gmake), then I propose we use GNU make for the new
Makefile system. GNU make has many features not found in other Make
commands which would be very useful to us.
The only downside to this is that we must have users install gmake
before they will be able to compile Grass. However, other Open Source
software requires gmake (postgreSQL and libgdal are a couple) and even
the SGI employee responsible for their freeware site recommends using it
rather than their own Make command. Thus, it appears that GNU make is
fairly popular.
What do people think?
Which features are you thinking of? VPATH ? I'm not against it, but I
wouldn't want to see it as a requirement unless there are some pretty
good reasons. We, of course, will want to also use libtool. No?
--
Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>
----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'
Hi Eric
"Eric G . Miller" wrote:
Which features are you thinking of? VPATH ? I'm not against it, but
I wouldn't want to see it as a requirement unless there are some
pretty good reasons.
I've just started looking at GNU Make since Eric Mitchell's new Makefile
uses it, so I'm no expert. The features I did find that I thought would
be useful are
o exit rule (or even exit make) on error - VERY useful since most Make
programs do not exit on error unless there is only one command
for the rule - would clean up current Makefile by eliminating
real-* targets which are hacks
o VPATH as you mentioned
o $(MAKE) -C subdir for recursive make
o ability to include other makefiles with single directive
o parallel execution
o several functions for text and command manipulation (join, subst,
sort, strip, etc)
o conditional statements (if's) - can be used in both variable
assignment and rules
o no conflicts between platforms since all platforms would run gmake
These are just some of the ones that caught my eye. Most of these can
probably be done without GNU Make, but GNU Make does seem to make it
look a lot easier than a regular Makefile.
We, of course, will want to also use libtool. No?
Again, I'm not familiar with libtool, but the short blurb I read says it
helps maintain shared libraries, so I don't see why we shouldn't use it.
--
Sincerely,
Jazzman (a.k.a. Justin Hickey) e-mail: jhickey@hpcc.nectec.or.th
High Performance Computing Center
National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC)
Bangkok, Thailand
People who think they know everything are very irritating to those
of us who do. ---Anonymous
Jazz and Trek Rule!!!
----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'
> We, of course, will want to also use libtool. No?
Again, I'm not familiar with libtool, but the short blurb I read says it
helps maintain shared libraries, so I don't see why we shouldn't use it.
My Makefile work has operated on the assumption that we
don't want the configure process updating makefiles in
every subdirectory to build in. The configure process
does this by running many sed processes, which can take
quite some time, especially with a lot of subdirectories.
Libtool is well integrated with automake, which is geared
for individual makefiles in each subdirectory. If it's
possible to use libtool independent of automake/configure,
I'm all about it. Mostly, it's a wrapper around shared
library construction details, for platform independence.
It looks like it could be useful.
--
+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+
| Eric B. Mitchell mailto:emitchell@altaira.com |
| tel: (301) 809 - 3534 Altair Aerospace Corporation |
| tel: (800) 7 - ALTAIR 4201 Northview Dr. Suite 410 |
| fax: (301) 805 - 8122 Bowie, MD 20716 |
+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+
,___
/"\ / o=\ /"""---===/
/ \_/ \__/ ---===/
| //\ || /""TT""/ //\ || ||""\
| // \ || || // \ || ||__/
| //--==\ |L--/ || //--==\ || || "=,
\ ---===/
\____---===/
----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'