From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8848 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Szabolcs Nagy Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Support for out-of-tree build Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 22:10:24 +0100 Message-ID: <20151112211024.GC18372@port70.net> References: <20151107130537.GC8500@port70.net> <20151108004323.GE3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20151108021630.GG8500@port70.net> <20151108022920.GL3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20151111230848.GZ3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20151112145026.GB18372@port70.net> <20151112203048.GB3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447362640 25403 80.91.229.3 (12 Nov 2015 21:10:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 21:10:40 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-8861-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Nov 12 22:10:40 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zwz8g-0008HC-Iv for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 22:10:38 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 23802 invoked by uid 550); 12 Nov 2015 21:10:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 23778 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2015 21:10:36 -0000 Mail-Followup-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151112203048.GB3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8848 Archived-At: * Rich Felker [2015-11-12 15:30:48 -0500]: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 08:17:05PM +0000, Petr Hosek wrote: > > There is one other issue with the VPATH solution which I just realized > > while trying to make changes to the original patch: the order-only > > dependencies don't work with VPATH because the directories already exist > > the source directory, so we'd need to use the solution with .dirstamps. > > Alternatively, configure could be responsible for making the skeleton > tree at the same time it puts a Makefile in the build dir. I don't > know if I like this approach but it's achievable with a simple find > command. > that only works if no new source directories are added after configure. > I'm still uncertain which approach (VPATH or non-VPATH) we should > take, so I'm trying to reason through the consequences of both. > depends on if we change the src/dir/arch layout and sub handling. if we dont change anything then i think vpath with dirstamps is the cleanest solution. it might be worth looking at how well make handles generated rules with foreach (instead of %.o patterns), then we can use whatever directory layout and precedence rules.