Severity: minor [CC:ing bug-automake, so that we won't forget about the issue]
On 03/23/2012 03:32 AM, Jason DeVinney wrote: > Hi all, > Hi Jason, sorry for the delay. > I have a upc program with *.upc source files. I have some macros that > make UPC code look effectively like C code and so it is easy to > compile this program as a C program as well. My Makefile.am has the > following lines > > bin_PROGRAMS = foo > common_sources = file1.upc file2.upc > > if BUILD_UPC > foo_LINK = $(UPCLINK) > foo_SOURCES = $(common_sources) > else > foo_LINK = $(LINK) > foo_SOURCES = $(common_sources:.upc=_c.c) > fi > > I also have some code in my Makefile.am to tell make how to create > (with links) the file1_c.c and file2_c.c files. The BUILD_UPC variable > is set with AC_SUBST in my configure.ac based on a configure option > (--disable-upc). If no option is given then BUILD_UPC is set to 1, but > if --disable-upc is given BUILD_UPC is zero. automake is correctly > automatically determining which compiler to use in both cases, but for > some reason it wants to use the UPCLINK linker in both cases. I read > section 8.13.3.1 How the Linker is Chosen, in the automake > documentation and it says that automake determines which linker to use > based on the foo_SOURCES variable, so I can't see why I need to > include the two foo_LINK lines in my Makefile.am (I would like to > avoid this). Does anyone know why this is happening? Am I forgetting > something? > I'd describe this as an automake limitation; not sure if it's worth fixing (since yours is not a common use case, and the issue you're facing has a simple-enough workaround, as you've already found out); but it would be worth documenting IMHO. Care to write a patch? Otherwise, I'll try to cook one up myself before the 1.11.4 release (but I'm short of time these days, so no promise). Thanks, Stefano
