Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: February 2004:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7390) python code generators and BUILT_SOURCES
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7390) python code generators and BUILT_SOURCES

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#7390) python code generators and BUILT_SOURCES
From: "Jason Short" <jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:08:45 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7390 >

Raimar Falke wrote:
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7390 >
> 
> On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 02:42:05PM -0800, Jason Short wrote:
> 
>><URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=7390 >
>>
>>>[i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx - Sun Feb 08 14:53:40 2004]:
>>
>>>But isn't this a generic problem of the dependcy generation if some
>>>*.h/*.c files are generated?! Looks like an misfeature of automake.
>>
>>Yes, that's what BUILT_SOURCES is for.
>>
>>No.  Probably we can ignore the problem.  If anything we should add
>>
>>BUILT_SOURCES = packets_gen.c packets_gen.h
>>
>>and the same for other generated C files.
> 
> 
> What are the downsides here? I.e. why can we do this/why haven't we
> done this?

No downsides.  Here's a patch.  This fixes the bug of out-of-order 
compilation that happens in the rare case.

jason

? ~?built_sources.diff
Index: common/Makefile.am
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/freeciv/CVS/freeciv/common/Makefile.am,v
retrieving revision 1.48
diff -u -r1.48 Makefile.am
--- common/Makefile.am  2004/01/17 17:21:20     1.48
+++ common/Makefile.am  2004/02/11 16:06:55
@@ -97,5 +97,6 @@
                version.c       \
                version.h
 
+BUILT_SOURCES = packets_gen.c packets_gen.h
 packets_gen.h packets_gen.c: packets.def generate_packets.py
        ./generate_packets.py

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]