1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 <2013> 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 | Index | 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 <2013> 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
<== Date ==> | <== Thread ==> |
---|
Subject: | Re: What I learned today... |
From: | Michael Davidsaver <[email protected]> |
To: | [email protected] |
Date: | Thu, 28 Feb 2013 10:51:51 -0500 |
On 02/28/2013 09:57 AM, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Thursday, February 28, 2013 09:41:14 Michael Davidsaver wrote:Makefiles are so much fun... If you don't like creating marker files (which must be cleaned) you can also do:one two three: create_some_files.pl ./create_some_files.pl three: two two: oneThis creates a dependency chain forcing sequential execution.Yes, but... (1) The script can be called more often than necessary:
I don't think this is the case as long as the command './create_some_files.pl' creates all three files (which I assume it what you intended).
It is my understanding that the existence and timestamp of the target file are checked immediately after all dependent rules have run, and not when the dependency tree is computed. This is why these rules work when with '-j1'.
(2) Getting the additional sequentializing dependencies right is harder and the result less obvious.
I certainly can't argue with this.
Again, think of a generated list of many, many files (in our case the script creates 692 targets).
Wow. I agree that what I describe would not scale to this. I've typically used this for code generators which produce two or three output files.