[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: make .ORDER
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 06:00:11PM +0100, Edgar Fu? wrote:
> Is there a sane way to have target A built before target B without
> having B depend on A? Is .ORDER A B guaranteed to do that? The
> description of .ORDER says "The ordering imposed by .ORDER is only
> relevant for parallel makes." Does that mean it only imposes the
> ordering restrictions for parallel makes or the author of the
> manpage couldn't think of an example other that parallel makes
> where you will want a particular order without a dependency?
In a non-parallel make it's sufficient to write
X: A B
and it will always do A before B.
> In my case, A is a directory containing B. The rules for A install
> -d and the rules for B install /dev/null. With B depending on A, B
> will be wiped out whenever you touch another file in directory A.
> Probably there's a more elegant way to acheive the same thing.
One way is to use touch to create B, so extra runs don't do any
(serious) harm. I wouldn't call that *more* elegant though.
Another way is to forget the rule for A and write something like
[ -d A ] || install -d A
install -c /dev/null B
but that's also hackish.
IME using make rules for directories never works all that well,
David A. Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |