|
|
On 1 Apr 2008 at 12:20, fnegroni wrote:
> On Apr 1, 11:16�am, Antoninus Twink <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On �1 Apr 2008 at �8:05, M.Liang Liu wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > I have a project with the following dirs:
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > ------------
>> > +src
>> > �|-proj0
>> > � � �|-program1
>> > � � �|-program2
>> > �|-proj1
>> > � � �|-program1
>> > � � �|-program2
>> > � � �|-program3
>> > � � �|-program4
>> > �|-proj3
>> > � � �|-program1
>> > � � �|-program2
>> > � � �|-program3
>> > � �....
>> > �|-proj9
>> > -Makefile
>> > +include
>> > -README
>> > +lib
>> > �|-lib1
>> > �|-lib2
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > ------------
>> > There are 10 project-dirs here in src, named proj0-proj9. Each project
>> > has several program_dirs which containing some .c files
>> > All .h files are under include in the top dir, the same as src.
>>
>> > I would like to write a makefile, which can help me compile all the .c
>> > files and generate an executable file for each *program*. �Considering
>> > there are several independent programs in each project, the work
>> > should be done within a single makefile at the top dir.
>>
>> > How can I deal all the programs under each project in a single top-
>> > level makefile?
>>
>> Which part of the section of your make program's documentation on
>> recursive use of make didn't you understand?
>
> I think this is OT. comp.unix.programmer might be a better place to
> ask this question.
That seems unlikely, given that the OP appears to be posting from a
Windows box.
> I believe recursive makefiles have serious flaws and should be
> avoided.
I believe you've read some stupid polemic about recursive Makefiles
having serious flaws, and have bought into it hook line and sinker.
> In this case, if each project is standalone, each needs a Makefile and
> then you might want a script to run all the makefiles in sequence.
A "script", eh? But definitely not a top-level Makefile?
> If the project are interlinked, the one makefile would be enough, just
> use relative paths in your dependencies.
That would be one way, but then you end up with one incredibly complex
Makefile. Why not split the Makefile, for exactly the same reason that
you separate out the source files into different directories?
> Also, a better source code file structuring also helps: I would place
> all source files together in the same directory. After all, if they
> are interrelated, what would be the advantage in splitting them about?
>
> But that's my opinion. Yours may differ.
It sounds like the OP's project consists of one or more libraries, and
then some number of independent executables that link against these
libraries. Separating the source files for each executable into its own
directory seems perfectly reasonable to me.
|
|