severity 14441 minor tags 14441 + patch stop Reference: <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=14441>
On 05/22/2013 09:35 PM, Felix Salfelder wrote: > Hi there > Hi Felix, sorry for the delay. > i have discovered a bug in file extensions handling [1]. consider two > Makefile.am's (skipping hopefully unneeded information): > > === $(top_srcdir)/Makefile.am: > SUBDIRS = bug > lib_LTLIBRARIES = libone.la > libone_la_SOURCES = one.ext > > .ext.cc: > #whatever > === > > === $(top_srcdir)/bug/Makefile.am: > lib_LTLIBRARIES = libtwo.la > libtwo_la_SOURCES = two.ext > > .ext.c: > #whatever else > === > Yikes, having files with the same extension turned into C sources in one Makefile and C++ files in another seems very confusing, and likely the recipe for a minor disaster. Still, that's not a good reason for Automake to mishandle the situation. We should behave correctly, and allow the user to shoot himself in the foot if he really wants to. > here, the misuse of the extension .ext is intentional. libone is meant > to be compiled from one.cc and libtwo from two.c. automake -v reports > something different. > > [..] > automake: thread 0: reading Makefile.am > automake: thread 0: Sources ending in .ext become .cc > [..] > automake: thread 0: creating Makefile.in > automake: thread 0: reading bug/Makefile.am > automake: thread 0: Sources ending in .ext become .c > > and then (wrong): > > automake: thread 0: Sources ending in .cc become .o > automake: thread 0: Sources ending in .cc become .obj > automake: thread 0: Sources ending in .cc become .lo > automake: thread 0: creating bug/Makefile.in > [..] > > within bug/Makefile.in, automake writes (wrong) > .cc.lo: > # LTCXXCOMPILE command > instead of the needed .c.lo rule. > > after "touch bug/Makefile.am; make -C bug Makefile" bug/Makefile.in > correctly contains > .c.lo: > # LTCOMPILE command > instead. > > i suspect there's something wrong with $extension_map scoping and > initialize_per_input, but i have no clue how to fix it. would you agree > that this is a bug? > Yes. Confirmed and fixed. I will soon post a patch series about the fix (and other related refactories thrown in "while at it"). > regards > felix > > PS: please CC replies to me, as i am not subscribed (yet). > Keeping the OP in CC: is the default policy here; we can't expect anyone who reports a bug to subscribe himself to our mailing list :-) > [1] http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/Suffixes.html > Thanks, Stefano
