I have a very simple Makefile that isn't doing what I expect it would do. The ultimate goal is that it should call itself recursively, including the appropriate file each time, resulting in a build specific to what was included (I'm building several projects that all share the same code base, but utilize different combinations of the source files). I've never really dealt with recursive calls to make, so I must be missing something obvious. At the moment, I only have one .mk file in the same folder as my Makefile. It's a simple one-liner just for the purposes of this test. It will eventually contain various per-project settings.
Makefile:
SHELL = /bin/sh
ifdef MYFILE
include $(MYFILE)
PROGRAM = $(basename $(MYFILE))
endif
all: $(wildcard *.mk)
dummy:
#echo -- Entering dummy stub ... why do I need this?
%.mk: dummy
#echo Calling $(MAKE) MYFILE=$# $*
$(MAKE) MYFILE=$# $*
$(PROGRAM): objs
#echo Time to link!
objs:
#echo Building objs!
test.mk
SOMEVAR = SomeValue
I have the following two problems:
Problem 1
If I remove the dummy prerequisite from my pattern rule, the pattern rule never gets called (I get the dreaded 'Nothing to be done for all' error). Is there a way I can get the recipes under the %.mk rule to run without needing that dummy prerequisite?
Problem 2
Given the two aforementioned files, I would expect make to do the following:
make[1] starts and hit the all rule
make[1] jumps down to the %.mk pattern rule
make[1] calls itself recursively (the call would look like make MYFILE=test.mk test)
make[2] starts, includes the test.mk file, and sets up the PROGRAM variable
make[2] jumps down to the $(PROGRAM) rule (since we were explicitly called with that target)
make[2] jumps to the objs rule, runs the recipes, and returns back up the chain
In actuality, make gets stuck on the %.mk pattern rule and enters an infinite loop. I don't understand why it's insisting on hitting the pattern rule, when I explicitly told it to build test in my first recursive call (which should correspond to the $(PROGRAM) target). What am I missing here?
Problem 0:
This is overdesigned. You don't need to use recursive Make here.
Problem 1:
The reason Make doesn't try to rebuild test.mk (without a dummy preq) is that test.mk is up to date. A better approach is to switch to a static pattern rule and use PHONY:
MKS = $(wildcard *.mk)
.PHONY: $(MKS)
$(MKS): %.mk:
#echo Calling $(MAKE) MYFILE=$# $*
$(MAKE) MYFILE=$# $*
An even better approach is not to use the name of a real file as a target of a rule that doesn't rebuild (or even "touch") that file.
Problem 2:
In make[2], the makefile includes test.mk. If a makefile includes another file, Make will attempt to rebuild that file before doing anything else. If there is a rule for that file (which there is) and if it succeeds (which it does) Make then reinvokes itself.
You should reconsider this design from the ground up. There are many ways to get the behavior you're looking for, depending on the specifics (how many variable will be defined in a foo.mk? do you really want to manage the build by manually moving those files around? and so on).
P.S. Here's one kludge that springs to mind. Whether it suits your case depends on the specifics:
makefile:
# includes nothing
%.mk: dummy
#echo Calling $(MAKE) MYFILE=$# -f $# $*
$(MAKE) MYFILE=$# -f $# $*
test.mk:
SOMEVAR = SomeValue
include makefile
Related
I'm often creating png files out of dot (graphviz format) files. The command to do so is the following:
$ dot my_graph.dot -o my_graph.png -Tpng
However, I would like to be able to have a shorter command format like $ make my_graph.dot to automatically generate my png file.
For the moment, I'm using a Makefile in which I've defined the following rule, but the recipe is only available in the directory containing the Makefile
%.eps: %.dot
dot $< -o $# -Teps
Is it possible to define custom implicit GNU Make recipes ? Which would allow the above recipe to be available system-wide
If not, what solution do you use to solve those kind of problem ?
Setup:
Fedora Linux with ZSH/Bash
You could define shell functions in your shell's startup files, e.g.
dotpng()
{
echo dot ${1%.dot}.dot -o ${1%.dot}.png -Tpng;
}
This function can be called like
dotpng my_graph.dot
or
dotpng my_graph
The code ${1%.dot}.dot strips .dot from the file name if present and appends it (again) to allow both my_graph.dot and my_graph as function argument.
Is it possible to define custom implicit GNU Make recipes ?
Not without modifying the source code of GNU Make.
If not, what solution do you use to solve those kind of problem ?
I wouldn't be a fan o modyfying the system globally, but you could do:
Create a file /usr/local/lib/make/myimplicitrules.make with the content
%.eps: %.dot
dot $< -o $# -Teps
Use include /usr/local/lib/make/myimplicitrules.make in your Makefile.
I would rather use a git submodule or similar to share common configuration between projects, rather than depending on global configuration. Depending on global environment will make your program hard to test and non-portable.
I would rather go with a shell function, something along:
mymake() {
make -f <(cat <<'EOF'
%.eps: %.dot
dot $< -o $# -Teps
EOF
) "$#"
}
mymake my_graph.dot
GNU Make lets you specify extra makefiles to read using the MAKEFILES
environment variable. Quoting from info '(make)MAKEFILES Variable':
the default goal is never taken from one of these makefiles (or any
makefile included by them) and it is not an error if the files listed
in 'MAKEFILES' are not found
if you are running 'make' without a specific makefile, a makefile
in 'MAKEFILES' can do useful things to help the built-in implicit
rules work better
As an example, with no makefile in the current directory and the
following .mk files in make's include path (e.g. via
MAKEFLAGS=--include-dir="$HOME"/.local/lib/make/) you can create
subdir gen/ and convert my_graph.dot or dot/my_graph.dot by
running:
MAKEFILES=dot.mk make gen/my_graph.png
To further save some typing it's tempting to add MAKEFILES=dot.mk
to a session environment but defining MAKEFILES in startup files
can make things completely nontransparent. For that reason I prefer
seeing MAKEFILES=… on the command line.
File: dot.mk
include common.mk
genDir ?= gen/
dotDir ?= dot/
dotFlags ?= $(if $(DEBUG),-v)
Tvariant ?= :cairo:cairo
vpath %.dot $(dotDir)
$(genDir)%.png $(genDir)%.svg $(genDir)%.eps : %.dot | $(genDir).
dot $(dotFlags) $< -o $# -T'$(patsubst .%,%,$(suffix $#))$(Tvariant)'
The included common.mk is where you'd store general definitions to
manage directory creation, diagnostics etc., e.g.
.PRECIOUS: %/. ## preempt 'unlink: ...: Is a directory'
%/. : ; $(if $(wildcard $#),,mkdir -p -- $(#D))
References:
?= = := … - info '(make)Reading Makefiles'
vpath - info '(make)Selective Search'
order-only prerequisites (e.g. | $(genDir).) - info '(make)Prerequisite Types'
.PRECIOUS - info '(make)Chained Rules'
If you run make test on the following Makefile (with an otherwise empty directory):
test.%:
#echo $*
test: test.dummyextension
you get the following output:
dummyextension
o
cc test.o test.dummyextension -o test
clang: error: no such file or directory: 'test.o'
clang: error: no such file or directory: 'test.dummyextension'
clang: error: no input files
make: *** [test] Error 1
Why?
I suspect it has something todo with implicit rules, but I searched make -p on my machine, and can't find any implicit rules that match %: %. I would expect the output to simply be dummyextension, but it's almost like there's a phantom test.o file in my directory (despite my checking ten times that there is not).
If you put a ; after the test.dummyextension prerequisite, or add any content to the test rule, everything works as expected. This is the minimal failing example I can come up with, and I haven't a clue why you'd see this behaviour. Any ideas?
Make can chain multiple rules to create a target. In this case it has the following built-in rule:
%: %.o
$(LINK.o) $^ $(LOADLIBES) $(LDLIBS) -o $#
This tells make that it can make test if it can find a way to make intermediate file test.o. So now it looks for a way to make test.o and it sees your pattern rule test.%:, which matches with stem o. So it has found a way!
You have also told make that test needs test.dummyextension, so it looks for a way to make that and again the pattern test.%: matches, this time with stem dummyextension.
So make first runs the test.% recipe twice to make the two prereqs. Then it runs the %: %.o recipe to make the final target. The $^ in the recipe is all prerequisites, so both test.o, gained from the built-in pattern rule, and test.dummyextension, gained by the explicit dependency in your Makefile, appear in the command.
You can test this by using the -r flag to disable built-in rules and then add the above pattern rule manually to your Makefile.
The key points to understand here are:
A line of the form:
test: test.dummyextension
Only adds a dependency to a target. It is not a rule to make the target. That can come from elsewhere. Make does not see this and decide test should be created with a blank recipe.
A stanza of the form:
test: test.dummyextension
;
This is a rule to make the target. Being an explicit rule it has a higher priority than a pattern rule that might also match. This does tell make it has found the rule to make test using the recipe ; and it stops looking for another rule.
Make will search for an implicit rule to make any target if it does not find an explicit one. If you don't want it to do this, you can either give it an explicit rule, like above, or declare the target as phony, with .PHONY: target. Implicit rules are not searched for phony targets.
I have a makefile in a directory of mine which builds scripts with certain environment variables set. What if I want to create another makefile in the same directory with different environment variables set? How should I name the two make files? Does makefile.1 and makefile.2 work? How do I call them?
You can give sensible names to the files like makefile.win and makefile.nix and use them:
make -f makefile.win
make -f makefile.nix
or have a Makefile that contains:
win:
make -f makefile.win
nix:
make -f makefile.nix
and use make win or make nix
You can name makefile whatever you want. I usually name it like somename.mk. To use it later you need to tell make what makefile you want. Use -f option for this:
make -f somename.mk
Actually you can have two set of environment variables in the same make file. for example
COMPILER = gcc
CCFLAGS1 = -g
CCFLAGS2 = -Wall
a: main.c
${COMPILER} ${CCFLAGS1} main.c
b: test.c
${COMPILER} ${CCFLAGS2} test.c
then you can just say make a or make b. Depending on what you want.
Also it is possible with -f flag to call which makefile you want to call.
You can do something like this rather than using multiple makefiles for the same purpose. You can pass the environment or set a flag to the same makefile. For eg:
ifeq ($(ENV),ENV1)
ENV_VAR = THIS
else
ENV_VAR = THAT
endif
default : test
.PHONY : test
test:
#echo $(ENV_VAR)
Then you can simply run the make command with arguments
make ENV=ENV1
I have two makefiles in the same directory. Many of the recipes have identical names and here are two solutions:
1. Prefix in make
proja_hello:
#echo "hello A"
projb_hello:
#echo "hello N"
2. Keep two separate files
Project A has makefile. Type make hello.
Project B has a separate make file called projb.mk. Type bmake hello.
This works since I've added alias bmake ='make -f projb.mk to my .bashrc. Note! This command can be called anywhere but only works where projb.mk exists.
Note! You lose autocompletion of make with the alias and typing make -f projb.mk hello is not better than typing make projb_hello.
I'm trying to port linux kernel's kconfig util to my product
while compiling I got next error:
make[6]: *** No rule to make target `zconf.tab.c', needed by `zconf.tab.o'. Stop.
I found next rule in Makefile.lib for this file
$(obj)/%: $(src)/%_shipped
$(call cmd,shipped)
It looks ok for me and it just works in kernel but not in my product.
Then I added another rule right after previous one.
$(obj)/%c: $(src)/%c_shipped
$(call cmd,shipped)
And now it works just fine.
Can someone explain me what's wrong with original rule?
In my case obj=. and src=. (both = dot). Current dir contains appropriate *_shipped file.
My guess is that $(obj)/%: $(src)/%_shipped qualifies as a match-anything pattern rule. (The manual doesn't mention how targets and prerequisites with with directory components are handled, but it would make sense.)
Note the following in the manual:
A non-terminal match-anything rule cannot apply to a file name that indicates a specific type of data. A file name indicates a specific type of data if some non-match-anything implicit rule target matches it.
Since there are already built-in implicit rules for creating .c files (using parser generators for example), the match-anything rule is never considered.
The reason the error doesn't happen for the kernel makefiles is that they run make with -r, which eliminates built-in implicit rules. It's done in the top-level makefile by setting the MAKEFLAGS variable:
# Do not use make's built-in rules and variables
# (this increases performance and avoids hard-to-debug behaviour);
MAKEFLAGS += -rR
As a simple experiment, I created a file test.c_foo and the following makefile:
MAKEFLAGS += -r
%: %_foo
#echo building
make test.c without the first line gives
make: *** No rule to make target 'test.c'. Stop.
With the first line, it prints "building" instead.
I'm writing a static pattern rule to generate a list of dependencies for targets matching a pattern. The dependencies are generated through a shell command (the file content gives information about the dependencies). Here's an example of the explicit rule:
f1.o: $(shell gendep src/f1/f1.source)
... (some compilation command here) ...
While this works, I do not want to rewrite it for each new target since I'm maintaining the same file structure. My attempt at static pattern rule was like so:
%.o: $(shell gendep src/%/%.source)
...
I'm having trouble passing the stem (matched pattern for %) to the shell command. The shell command interprets it literally and operates on src/%/%.source, which of course doesn't exist.
I suspect there is way of passing the stem to the shell command but I don't seem to find it. Any experts here might be able to help me? Sorry if this is a newbie question (I'm indeed one).
What you're trying to do is difficult, because ordinarily Make will expand the $(shell ...) directive before running any rule, or even deciding which rules must be run. We can retard that by means of Secondary Expansion, a slightly advanced Make trick:
.SECONDEXPANSION:
%.o: $$(shell gendep src/$$*/$$*.source)
...
There are also other methods for automatic dependency generation.