* Reuben Thomas wrote on Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 02:39:31PM CET: > On 27 February 2011 06:53, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Anyway, the next step to pursue this would be to think hard about the > > desired semantics, > > The tricky part here is that latexmk does its own dependency finding.
Well yes. Also, as you already mentioned, latex semantics don't really fit a directed graph where the nodes are files; rather, it needs a more complex diagram of states of sets of files. I don't think trying to map that to portable make would be a worthwhile endeavor, given that latexmk already exists. I think we should just try to find rules that are safe in the sense of: they call out to latexmk when needed, and not too often when it is not needed. > Hence, in my example rules I only list the root file for each > document. Right. But that will fail to do TRT when you then go and edit another file which becomes part of the document. > I suppose that what one would want is something like the makedepends > support one gets from a C compiler, so that the dependencies could be > extracted by automake and included in the makefile automatically? That could be an improvement. Or, as a first step, just calling latexmk every time. Does it do anything if files are up to date? Do you happen to know if latexmk works with pgfplots? Thanks, Ralf
