Modifying configure.ac - check for package presence - configure

My main development platform is Gentoo on Linux. However, recently I tried to build my program on the fresh VM install on Debian.
My program contains of main binary and couple of dll/so/dylib libraries. One of the libraries depends on the presence of unixODBC/iODBC.
I was told by unixODBC maintainers to use odbc_config script to identify the build parameters.
When I build on Gentoo - everything works fine. There is no problems.
However, when I build on Debian - the build fails because apparently Debian does not produce odbc_config script and instead in this case rely on pkg-config.
So, I need to add a test in configure.ac to check for odbc_config script presence and pass it along to one of the so files generation (lets call it libodbc_lib project).
Could someone please help me with this?
EDIT:
Is this correct to be put in configure.ac:
AC_CHECK_PROG(ODBC,odbc_config,yes)
if test x"${ODBC}" == x"yes" ; then
ODBC_CFLAGS = `odbc_config --cflags`
ODBC_LIBS = `odbc_config --libs` -lodbcinst
else
ODBC_CFLAGS = `pkg-config odbc --cflags`
ODBC_LIBS = `pkg-config odbc --libs` -lodbcinst
fi
AC_SUBST(ODBC_CFLAGS)
AC_SUBST(ODBC_LIBS)
If it is - how do I use ODBC_FLAGS/ODBC_LIBS in my subproject?
EDIT2:
Based on this answer I used the following code:
In the main configure.ac:
AC_CHECK_PROG(ODBC,odbc_config,yes)
if test x"${ODBC}" == x"yes" ; then
ODBC_CFLAGS = `odbc_config --cflags`
ODBC_LIBS = `odbc_config --libs` -lodbcinst
else
ODBC_CFLAGS = `pkg-config odbc --cflags`
ODBC_LIBS = `pkg-config odbc --libs` -lodbcinst
fi
AC_SUBST(ODBC_CFLAGS)
AC_SUBST(ODBC_LIBS)
In the libodbc_lib/Makefile.am:
libodbc_lib_la_CXXFLAGS = -I../../dbinterface \
-DUNICODE \
-DUNIXODBC \
-I#ODBC_CFLAGS#
libodbc_lib_la_LDFLAGS = -L../dbinterface \
-ldbinterface \
#ODBC_LIB#
I regenerated configure, run it successfully and then tried running make.
I got following error:
CXXLD libodbc_lib.la
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find #ODBC_LIB#: No such file or directory
What I did wrong?
EDIT3:
After fixing the missing S, I got following compile commands:
make[2]: Entering directory '/home/igor/dbhandler/Debug/libodbc'
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc -I.. -I../../dbinterface -DUNICODE -DUNIXODBC -I#IODBC_CFLAGS# -g -O0 -MT libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.Tpo -c -o libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.lo `test -f 'database_odbc.cpp' || echo '/home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc/'`database_odbc.cpp
libtool: compile: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc -I.. -I../../dbinterface -DUNICODE -DUNIXODBC -I#IODBC_CFLAGS# -g -O0 -MT libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.Tpo -c /home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc/database_odbc.cpp -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.o
libtool: compile: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc -I.. -I../../dbinterface -DUNICODE -DUNIXODBC -I#IODBC_CFLAGS# -g -O0 -MT libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.Tpo -c /home/igor/dbhandler/libodbc/database_odbc.cpp -o libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.o >/dev/null 2>&1
mv -f .deps/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.Tpo .deps/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.Plo
/bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CXX --mode=link g++ -I../../dbinterface -DUNICODE -DUNIXODBC -I#IODBC_CFLAGS# -g -O0 -L../dbinterface -ldbinterface -o libodbc_lib.la -rpath /usr/local/lib libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.lo
libtool: link: g++ -fPIC -DPIC -shared -nostdlib /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../../../lib64/crti.o /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/crtbeginS.o .libs/libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.o -L../dbinterface -ldbinterface -L/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0 -L/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../../../lib64 -L/lib/../lib64 -L/usr/lib/../lib64 -L/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib -L/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../.. -lstdc++ -lm -lc -lgcc_s /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/crtendS.o /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/11.3.0/../../../../lib64/crtn.o -g -O0 -Wl,-soname -Wl,libodbc_lib.so.0 -o .libs/libodbc_lib.so.0.0.0
libtool: link: (cd ".libs" && rm -f "libodbc_lib.so.0" && ln -s "libodbc_lib.so.0.0.0" "libodbc_lib.so.0")
libtool: link: (cd ".libs" && rm -f "libodbc_lib.so" && ln -s "libodbc_lib.so.0.0.0" "libodbc_lib.so")
libtool: link: ar cru .libs/libodbc_lib.a libodbc_lib_la-database_odbc.o
libtool: link: ranlib .libs/libodbc_lib.a
libtool: link: ( cd ".libs" && rm -f "libodbc_lib.la" && ln -s "../libodbc_lib.la" "libodbc_lib.la" )
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/igor/dbhandler/Debug/libodbc'
I still the variable name there and not their values.
Is it normal?

As UnixODBC upstream does ship and install *.pc files, I would expect that file to be both present and correct and therefore I would ignore any *-config scripts. The pkg-config system is quite well thought out and works even for quite weird cross compilation environments. The *.pc mechanism works well on Linux, on FreeBSD, on OSX, cross-compiling for Windows on Linux, to name a few.
A well-written _config program written in portable shell could do the same by basically reproducing much of the pkg-config logic in portable shell for each and every _config script, hopefully correctly.
However, odbc_config is not a portable shell script. It is a binary executable, i.e. it will regularly break for cross-compiling, as the system you build on will usually not be able to run programs like odbc_config which are built to run on the system you are building for.
And even if the flags from the *.pc files were unsuitable for a very unusual build environment: Using PKG_CHECK_MODULES defines appropriate _CFLAGS and _LIBS variables for the configure script, so even in a very unusual build environments one can always override whatever the *.pc file might contain by calling configure like
../configure ODBC_CFLAGS='-I/weird/stuff -DWEIRD_STRING="moo"' ODBC_LIBS='-L/very/weird/libxyz -lodbc'
So... using odbc_config has no advantages, upstream already provides a odbc.pc file so it is always present, so why not just always use odbc.pc?
So, in configure.ac (if builds without odbc.pc present should fail, otherwise you will have to do some AC_DEFINE and/or AM_CONDITIONAL to conditionally build with or without ODBC support) do
m4_pattern_forbid([PKG_CHECK_MODULES])dnl
PKG_CHECK_MODULES([ODBC], [odbc])
and in any subdirectory (what you call "subproject") Makefile.am or Makefile-files where you need to link somehting against libodbc, put, depending on whether you are building an executable
bin_PROGRAMS += foobar
[…]
foobar_CPPFLAGS += $(ODBC_CFLAGS)
foobar_LDADD += $(ODBC_LIBS)
or a (libtool) library
lib_LTLIBRARIES += libfoo.la
[…]
libfoo_la_CPPFLAGS += $(ODBC_CFLAGS)
libfoo_la_LIBADD += $(ODBC_LIBS)
That should work for all native and cross-compile builds in properly set up build environments, and people can still override odbc_CFLAGS and odbc_LIBS in case of problems.
Of course, you can always AC_CHECK_PROG or AC_PATH_PROG or AC_CHECK_TOOL or AC_PATH_TOOL together with an AC_ARG_VAR for the odbc_config program and then define and AC_SUBST an _CFLAGS and _LIBS variable set to the output of $ODBC_CONFIG --cflags and $ODBC_CONFIG --libs, respectively, and then then use the _CFLAGS and _LIBS vars in Makefile.am/Makefile-files as above.
However, that is a lot of code to write, and with a lot of special cases to consider, and if you have to ask about how to do this you will probably get a lot more wrong than if you just just use PKG_CHECK_MODULES.
You can always add something later if the PKG_CHECK_MODULES route actually does not work for a use case and which cannot be fixed within the pkg-config framework. Until that time (if it ever happens), I would recommend to just use the simple PKG_CHECK_MODULES method and probably be done.

So, I need to add a test in configure.ac to check for odbc_config script presence and pass it along to one of the so files generation
Autoconf has AC_PATH_PROG() for checking for a program in the executable search path. You would of course use AC_SUBST() to define one or more output variables by which to convey the results to the generated makefiles.
But no, coming back around to my comment on the answer to one of your previous questions, what you ought to do is not have configure forward information about the executable, but rather for it to determine the needed flags itself and forward them, via one or more output variables. If you continue to use odbc_config, at least conditionally, then that means having configure run it and capture the output. You should not inject shell command substitutions into your compilation commands.
And if you substitute a different mechanism, whether conditionally or exclusively, then similarly for that. (That's what your other answer describes with respect to pkg-config.)

Related

Im trying to compile program on Ubuntu and dont understand some things

Im a Windows dev who has no expirience on building C/C++ programs on Linux, but now I need to. Right way would be to go and learn Make and g++ compiler, but before I commit to that I want to figure out some basic stuff.
So I have .c program which is compiled with this makefile:
CUDA_VER=11.5
ifeq ($(CUDA_VER),)
$(error "CUDA_VER is not set")
endif
APP:= deepstream-test3-app
TARGET_DEVICE = $(shell gcc -dumpmachine | cut -f1 -d -)
NVDS_VERSION:=6.0
LIB_INSTALL_DIR?=/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-$(NVDS_VERSION)/lib/
APP_INSTALL_DIR?=/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-$(NVDS_VERSION)/bin/
ifeq ($(TARGET_DEVICE),aarch64)
CFLAGS:= -DPLATFORM_TEGRA
endif
SRCS:= $(wildcard *.c)
$(info info is $(SRCS))
INCS:= $(wildcard *.h)
PKGS:= gstreamer-1.0
OBJS:= $(SRCS:.c=.o)
CFLAGS+= -I../../../includes \
-I /usr/local/cuda-$(CUDA_VER)/include
CFLAGS+= $(shell pkg-config --cflags $(PKGS))
LIBS:= $(shell pkg-config --libs $(PKGS))
LIBS+= -L/usr/local/cuda-$(CUDA_VER)/lib64/ -lcudart -lnvdsgst_helper -lm \
-L$(LIB_INSTALL_DIR) -lnvdsgst_meta -lnvds_meta \
-lcuda -Wl,-rpath,$(LIB_INSTALL_DIR)
$(info info is $(CFLAGS))
all: $(APP)
%.o: %.c $(INCS) Makefile
gcc -c -o $# $(CFLAGS) $<
$(APP): $(OBJS) Makefile
gcc -o $(APP) $(OBJS) $(LIBS)
install: $(APP)
cp -rv $(APP) $(APP_INSTALL_DIR)
clean:
rm -rf $(OBJS) $(APP)
First thing I tried is to change this Makefile to compile it as C++ program. I changed .c file into .cpp, in makefile I change gcc to g++ everywhere and .c to .cpp everywhere. It gave me error that it couldnt find "main" entry point.
I gave up on that pretty fast and decided just to use lines output of original makefile, ending up with this:
g++ -c -o deepstream_test3_app.o -I../../../includes -I /usr/local/cuda-11.5/include -pthread -I/usr/include/gstreamer-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include ./deepstream_test3_app.cpp
g++ -o deepstream-test3-app deepstream_test3_app.o -lgstreamer-1.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -L/usr/local/cuda-11.5/lib64/ -lcudart -lnvdsgst_helper -lm -L/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/ -lnvdsgst_meta -lnvds_meta -lcuda -Wl,-rpath,/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/
First question, can I combine this 2 launches of g++ into one?
Second, when I make changes to "./deepstream_test3_app.cpp" they are not noticed by compiler. I added
#include <iostream>
...
std::cout << "hello!" << std::endl;
and they are ignored. Its like g++ gets as input some other copy/older version of the file and I dont understand how to go about it.
Hope for any help, sorry if it's all sounds stupid.
Ignoring for the moment the issues surrounding compiling C code with a C++ compiler,
g++ -c -o deepstream_test3_app.o -I../../../includes -I /usr/local/cuda-11.5/include -pthread -I/usr/include/gstreamer-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include ./deepstream_test3_app.cpp
g++ -o deepstream-test3-app deepstream_test3_app.o -lgstreamer-1.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -L/usr/local/cuda-11.5/lib64/ -lcudart -lnvdsgst_helper -lm -L/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/ -lnvdsgst_meta -lnvds_meta -lcuda -Wl,-rpath,/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/
First question, can I combine this 2 launches of g++ into one?
Yes. It is a common practice in makefiles to separate the compilation and linking steps, but that is not mandatory. When there are multiple sources, the separation makes it possible to limit recompilations to only the source files that have changed, but it doesn't make much difference, makefile or not, when there is only one source file.
The one-command version would be mostly a concatenation of the two commands you gave. One would omit the -c option, which instructs g++ to compile but not link, and one would omit the -o deepstream_test3_app.o, which specifies the name of the object file that we are no longer going to create. One would also omit the appearance of deepstream_test3_app.o drawn from the link (second) command, as we are going straight from source file to program. The rest of the options can be reordered to some extent, but all the -l options need to remain in the same order relative to each other and to any object files among the inputs. Here is how I would write it:
g++ -c -o deepstream_test3_app -I../../../includes -I /usr/local/cuda-11.5/include -pthread -I/usr/include/gstreamer-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/glib-2.0/include -Wl,-rpath,/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/ ./deepstream_test3_app.cpp -lgstreamer-1.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -L/usr/local/cuda-11.5/lib64/ -lcudart -lnvdsgst_helper -lm -L/opt/nvidia/deepstream/deepstream-6.0/lib/ -lnvdsgst_meta -lnvds_meta -lcuda
Second, when I make changes to "./deepstream_test3_app.cpp" they are not noticed by compiler.
The compiler compiles the source file(s) you tell it to.
Its like g++ gets as input some other copy/older version of the file
It is possible that you are indeed telling it to compile a different version than the one you modified. It is also possible that compilation fails, so you don't get a new executable. And it is possible that when you try to run the result, you are not running the program you think you are running. We don't have enough information to know.
With regard to the last, however, do be aware that on Linux, unlike on Windows, the working directory is not automatically in the executable search path. If you want to run the compiled result from the above command, you would want to specify the path to it, which you could most easily do by prepending ./ to its simple name: ./deepstream-test3-app.

Makefile: "No such file or directory" for target file

First, I should admit makefiles are something that I'm very inexperienced at, so I apologize if this is an error that I should have been able to solve myself, but I have spent several hours on this, including reading the various answers on this site, and have been unable to discover a solution.
With that said, I have created the following makefile to compile my code on a Linux machine; it completes the sub compilations just fine, but when it comes to making the output itself, xPlatST, it throws an error.
g++ -std=c+=11 -g -Wall -pthread -c -o xPlatST.o xPlatST.cpp
g++ -std=c+=11 -g -Wall -pthread -c -o stdafx.o stdafx.cpp
g++ -std=c+=11 -g -Wall -pthread -c xPlatST xPlatST.o stdafx.o -L../hwloc
g++ error: xPlatST: No such file or directory
make: *** [xPlatST] Error 1
I believe it seems to think that the xPlatST is one of it's compilation files and thus can't find it, but for the life of me I can't work out why.
hwloc is a third party library, and should be unrelated to this issue. The code compiles just fine when compiled from the command line directly.
My files are xPlatST.cpp, xPlatST.h, stdafx.cpp, stdafh.h
Code is as follows:
CXX = g++ -std=c++11
INCLUDES =
LIBS = -L../hwloc
CXXFLAGS = -Wall -g -pthread
OBJS = xPlatST.o stdafx.o
xPlatST: ${OBJS}
${CXX} ${CXXFLAGS} ${INCLUDES} -c $# ${OBJS} ${LIBS}
clean:
-rm xPlatST *.o
Any help would be greatly appreciated; thank you in advance.
Your assumption is correct. Your recipe is trying to use xPlatST as a source. Change the -c into a -o in your rule:
${CXX} ${CXXFLAGS} ${INCLUDES} -o $# ${OBJS} ${LIBS}
The -c flag tells the compiler to take all files, compile, and assemble them into an object file (.o). The -o flag specifies the destination file.

Use of -meabi option in gcc powerpc compile

I have inherited a powerpc project that built fine under a SUSE linux environment back around 2008. My goal is to build the same thing in Linux Mint (v 17). The target processor is a powerpc, which is set in the environment variables, I believe. During the build on Mint linux, it produces the following error:
developer#Will-test-Mint-VM ~/temp/linux.apps $ make -f Makefile.runme
make DESTDIR=`pwd`/tmp install
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/developer/temp/linux.apps'
Making install in libStreamerControl
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/developer/temp/linux.apps/libStreamerControl'
/bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../include -I../include -ffixed-r14 -meabi -fno-builtin -std=gnu99 -Wall -g -O2 -MT streamerControl.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/streamerControl.Tpo -c -o streamerControl.lo streamerControl.c
libtool: compile: gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I../include -I../include -ffixed-r14 -meabi -fno-builtin -std=gnu99 -Wall -g -O2 -MT streamerControl.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/streamerControl.Tpo -c streamerControl.c -o streamerControl.o
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-meabi'
make[2]: *** [streamerControl.lo] Error 1
...
It is complaining about the -meabi option. I have installed/updated some packages that may be relevant (updated versions of eldk-5.6, automake, libtool, and powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc 4.8.2).
Specifically, I would like to know about the -meabi option. I didn't find a lot about it. What could be causing the compiler to not know what it is? I saw the output build from the SUSE setup, and it handled the -meabi option fine. Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Will
From your comment, it sounds like you're cross compiling here (ie., your build architecture is not the same as your host architecture). In this case, your (build) gcc won't recognise -meabi, as it's only valid for the host gcc.
So, you'll need to get your project building with the correct compiler for this to work. The method to do this will depend on the makefiles in your project. You've mentioned ARCH and CROSS_COMPILE, but these variables are specific to the Linux kernel's build system.
At a guess, your makefiles probably use some fairly standard variables to control the choice of compiler & toolchain, like CC, LD, etc. Try something like:
make -f Makefile.runme CC=powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc LD=powerpc-linux-gnu-ld
If your compile still fails, you may need to provide sources (or links to) your Makefiles.

Makefile: Why can't I see compilation output?

I have a master Makefile that calls submakefiles inside directories.
Those submakefiles are generated by autotools starting from Makefile.am and configure.ac files.
The first target of the entire project is a shared library, while the others are executables that link against it (so there is a dependency in the main Makefile).
The problem is that I can only see the compilation output of the shared library, while the other projects are just printing warnings and errors (just stderr text, I believe).
I can't understand what is causing this behaviour since all the projects are called from the very same rule in the master Makefile and all the submakefiles are autogenerated from very seemed configuration files.
The snippet of master Makefile that compiles all the targets looks like this:
SUBDIRS = libMylib app1 app2 app3
$(SUBDIRS):
$(ECHO) "-> Building $#"
$(MAKE) -C $#
$(ECHO) "-> Build of $# finished."
The output of "libMylib" is like:
-> Building libMylib
libtool: compile: ppc-linux-gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/opt/ELDK/ppc_8xx/usr/include/ -I/opt/ELDK/ppc_8xx/include/ -Wall -std=gnu99 -O2 -MT libMylibF1.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/libMylibF1.Tpo -c libMylibF1.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/libMylibF1.o
...
libtool: link: ppc-linux-gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC .libs/libMylibF1.o .libs/libMylibF2.o .libs/libMylibF3.o -Wl,-rpath -Wl,/opt/ELDK/ppc_8xx/lib -Wl,-rpath -Wl,/opt/ELDK/ppc_8xx/lib -lz -lpthread -O2 -Wl,-soname -Wl,libMylib.so.0 -o .libs/libMylib.so.0.0.0
libtool: link: (cd ".libs" && rm -f "libMylib.so.0" && ln -s "libMylib.so.0.0.0" "libawmg.so.0")
libtool: link: (cd ".libs" && rm -f "libMylib.so" && ln -s "libMylib.so.0.0.0" "libMylib.so")
libtool: link: ( cd ".libs" && rm -f "libMylib.la" && ln -s "../libMylib.la" "libMylib.la" )
-> Build of libAwmg finished.
While the output of any "appN" is:
-> Building app1
app1F1.c: In function `app1F1Func1':
app1F1.c:161: warning: unused variable `varA'
app1F2.c:85: warning: `app1F2FuncX' defined but not used
-> Build of app1 finished.
Could anyone please help me?
EDIT:
I found out that I was able to see the compile stuff in "libMylib" because it is "libtoolized".
If I "libtoolize" another project, I can see the linker part of the output (libtool: link:...).
So, considering that make calls a shell (sh) for each line in the rule, that $(MAKE) equals to just "make" and, by default, make is verbose, why do the submake is not printing its output to stdout?
Which flags may be passed to it so that this happens?
It depends on the Makefiles in the sub directories. If, for example, you have a # in front of the compile commands in the app Makefiles, then they will not output the commands that were being run (also look for $(Q), which is used quite commonly when you want to enable/disable verboseness in makefiles). Alternatively, your make commands in the apps directories may be pushing stdout to some files (which would still allow you to see the warnings).
By the same token your library makefile may be incorrectly redirecting stderr elsewhere, which would explain why you don't see any error outputs on that (or it just doens't have any errors...)
Please post the build rules in the other directories (and all associated variable definitions) if you want more help.
Well, my master makefile includes another file that puts a .SILENT rule in.
I haven't noticed that until today.
Removing this rule makes everithing work as expected.
Oh my...

How do you use cgo WITHOUT using make?

I use a custom build tool to compile go projects and I need a way to use cgo in my project.
The problem is that the cgo documentation only tells you how to use it with make.
What I really need to know is which generated files to process with which tools and in what order it needs to be done. I tried to read make.pkg in the go source dir but my best effort fails.
My test dll is very simple, a single function that returns 1 every time it is called and the go code to use this function is similarly simple.
The output from the console produced by a successful run of make on a cgo project would be very helpful.
Output of running make on 32-bit Linux in directory misc/cgo/life:
# gomake _obj/life.a
CGOPKGPATH= cgo -- life.go
touch _obj/_cgo_run
8g -o _go_.8 _obj/life.cgo1.go _obj/_cgo_gotypes.go
8c -FVw -I ${GOROOT}/pkg/linux_386 -I . -o "_cgo_defun.8" _obj/_cgo_defun.c
gcc -m32 -I . -g -fPIC -O2 -o _cgo_main.o -c _obj/_cgo_main.c
gcc -m32 -g -fPIC -O2 -o c-life.o -c c-life.c
gcc -m32 -I . -g -fPIC -O2 -o life.cgo2.o -c _obj/life.cgo2.c
gcc -m32 -I . -g -fPIC -O2 -o _cgo_export.o -c _obj/_cgo_export.c
gcc -m32 -g -fPIC -O2 -o _cgo1_.o _cgo_main.o c-life.o life.cgo2.o _cgo_export.o
cgo -dynimport _cgo1_.o >_obj/_cgo_import.c_ && mv -f _obj/_cgo_import.c_ _obj/_cgo_import.c
8c -FVw -I . -o "_cgo_import.8" _obj/_cgo_import.c
rm -f _obj/life.a
gopack grc _obj/life.a _go_.8 _cgo_defun.8 _cgo_import.8 c-life.o life.cgo2.o _cgo_export.o
The line cgo -- life.go creates the following files:
_obj/_cgo_.o
_obj/life.cgo1.go
_obj/life.cgo2.c
_obj/_cgo_gotypes.go
_obj/_cgo_defun.c
_obj/_cgo_main.c
_obj/_cgo_flags
_obj/_cgo_export.c
_cgo_export.h
"I use a custom build tool to compile go projects and I need a way to use cgo in my project."
... and this approach leads to problems. Using the standard way with a Makefile is simple, easy, proven, documented, etc.
I realize I'm not (directly) answering your question. Instead my "answer" is: I strongly suggest to use the standard way. Don't create problems for your self by choosing other, not directly supported options.
That said, I think there is a way to avoid the Makefiles, I just never been there, sorry. I'm usually lazy/short of time, so I use the simplest/fastest way to get things done. You might want to try the same ;-)

Resources