Mutex in GNU Make? - makefile

Two targets are satisfied by one rule like this:
foo.o foo.h :
build_foo # this makes both foo.o and foo.h
Later, some targets need one, others need both:
bar : foo.o
build_bar
baz : foo.h
build_baz
qux : bar baz
build qux
How do I prevent the recipe from running twice when make is invoked with -jN?

I avoid pattern rules when I can. In your case you will find that after the recipe is run, one of foo.o and foo.h is newer than the other (just use $ ls --full-time on them).
Let's assume your recipe creates foo.h and then goes on to create foo.o. That suggests:
foo.o: foo.h ; # Empty recipe
foo.h: prereq1 prereq2 ...
build_foo
So now if foo.o is a prequisite in another rule, make will build foo.h first, creating foo.o as a side-effect. Then it will run foo.o's recipe. Job done.
If you feel uneasy,
you could add a simple assert that foo.o is indeed newer than foo.h
foo.o: foo.h
test $# -nt $<
For more about this topic, check out the automake (not make) chapter titled Handling Tools that Produce Many Outputs

You do that by teaching make that the recipe builds both targets at the same time.
Your target:
foo.o foo.h :
build_foo # this makes both foo.o and foo.h
is seen by make the same as these targets:
foo.o :
build_foo # this makes both foo.o and foo.h
foo.h :
build_foo # this makes both foo.o and foo.h
which is the problem.
What you need is a pattern rule that specifies both target files.
%.o %.h :
build_foo # this makes both foo.o and foo.h
which works for this (but you really want to give it sane prerequisites) because of how GNU make handles pattern rules when they specify multiple targets:
Pattern rules may have more than one target. Unlike normal rules, this does not act as many different rules with the same prerequisites and recipe. If a pattern rule has multiple targets, make knows that the rule’s recipe is responsible for making all of the targets. The recipe is executed only once to make all the targets. When searching for a pattern rule to match a target, the target patterns of a rule other than the one that matches the target in need of a rule are incidental: make worries only about giving a recipe and prerequisites to the file presently in question. However, when this file’s recipe is run, the other targets are marked as having been updated themselves.

Related

Makefile: Pattern rule that can ignore directories

I am trying to have a Makefile rule that can generate an object file from a source file in a directory that is specified explicitly.
exe: foo.o bar.o
foo.o: path/to/foo.c
%.o: %.c
echo Making $# from $<
This example will find it needs to make "exe", then search to make "foo.o". The "foo.o" search will try pattern rules with stem "foo" and fail to use the rule because "foo.c" doesn't exist. I want to find a way to have it see that "foo.o" can be compiled from "path/to/foo.c" using the pattern rule.
In my case it doesn't make sense for me to have the rule be "%.o: path/to/%.c" because the path should be specified for each target that needs the source to be located in another directory.
The pattern rule works for "bar.o" being made from "bar.c" within the same directory and I want to keep that working.
The solution I am going with for now is:
define c-to-o-command
echo Making $# from $<
endef
exe: foo.o bar.o
foo.o: path/to/foo.c
$(c-to-o-command)
%.o: %.c
$(c-to-o-command)
This has a drawback that the command for the pattern rule is not visible in the Makefile at the same place. It also will need to be expanded for other pattern rules that may need to have this "out of path" dependency.

Can I add object files as dependency?

I have a makefile for multiple mains
info ::
#echo "make main1/2/3"
PROGS = main1 main2 main3
.SECONDEXPANSION:
${PROGS} :: $$#.o
${CC} -o $# $^
but one (and only one) main needs another object linked in. I tried solving that with
main3 :: lib.o
but somehow lib.o is not added to the list of prerequisites.
The ordering of the link lines makes a difference.
I add that main3 line after the PROGS link line, then that one bombs because of the missing object file.
If I add it before the PROGS line, then the custom line is executed first with a default rule, which I don't want, and then the PROGS rule is executed anyway, and it bombs.
Is there a way to use macros such as $^ for objects linking? I can of course split out main3 from the PROGS macro, but that macro is used for a bunch of other purposes too.
You are using double-colon rules in a case which doesn't seem to call for them. From the manual:
Double-colon rules with the same target are in fact completely separate from one another. Each double-colon rule is processed individually, just as rules with different targets are processed.
If you want different rules for the same target to combine (as you seem to want for main3), just switch to ordinary (single-colon) rules:
.SECONDEXPANSION:
${PROGS} : $$#.o
${CC} -o $# $^
main3 : lib.o
And you can make your ${PROGS} rule less complicated by turning it into a static pattern rule:
${PROGS} : % : %.o
${CC} -o $# $^

Match patten rule before explicit rule

I'm trying to generically add some behaviour to every target in a Makefile, without modifying the targets.
My current attempt is thus:
%: $*
#echo 'Logging $* target'
.PHONY: test
test:
#echo 'Inside explicit test target'
When I run make test, I'd like to match the % pattern rule, which would execute test as a prerequisite ($* expanding to the pattern stem), and then log the target that was run.
$ make test
Inside explicit test target
Logging test target
Instead, what happens is that make test matches the explicit test target (presumably since it's a closer match):
$ make test
Inside explicit test target
How can I get this to work, without changing the explicit test target?
EDIT:
Another attempt...
.SECONDEXPANSION:
%: $$*
#echo 'Logging $* target'
results in
$ make test
make: Circular Makefile <- Makefile dependency dropped.
inside actual test target
I appears from your own answer, which has beaten me to the punch, that
you're concerned only to trigger a preliminary action for targets that are
mentioned on the commandline - $(MAKECMDGOALS). From the posting I took
it that you wanted such an action for "every target in a Makefile", which
would include all targets that are prerequisite to the commandline targets or,
if there are no commandline targets, to the default target.
Anyhow, you may still be interested in a solution to the more general problem.
You want a preliminary action to be executed before the recipe for every target.
Your question is: how to match a patten rule before explicit rule?
This is an XY way of posing the problem, because make will consult pattern
rules to find a way of making a target only if you don't give it an explicit
recipe. You know, for example, that make has a pre-defined pattern rule for
making an .o file from a .c file. Even so, if my makefile is:
test.o:
#echo $#
then make prints test.o, without any attempt to find test.c and compile it.
And if my make file is:
test.o: test.c
#echo $#
test.c:
#echo $#
then make prints:
test.c
test.o
needing no resort to the pattern rule. But if my makefile is:
test.o: test.c
Then make says:
make: *** No rule to make target 'test.c', needed by 'test.o'. Stop
So you can't do what you're after in the way your question supposes,
because the preliminary action you want to provoke from the pattern
rule could be provoked only if there were no other action for the target.
In that case the reasons for the failures of your two posted attempts are fairly academic,
and you may wish to scroll to The Chase.
In your first attempt, with:
%: $*
#echo 'Logging $* target'
The pattern rule - which is unemployed by make test - is equivalent to:
%:
#echo 'Logging $* target'
because $* only assumes a value in the recipe, not in the pattern rule. You
can make this pattern rule be employed by making any target for which the
makefile does not provide a recipe, e.g. make nonsuch will print Logging nonsuch target;
but that is of no use.
The second attempt, with:
.SECONDEXPANSION:
%: $$*
#echo 'Logging $* target'
does the right thing to create the rule you intend to create. But the
meaning of that rule is:
<target>: <target>
#echo 'Logging <target> target'
making every target to which this rule is applied a prerequisite of itself.
Inevitably this will result in a circular dependency error for all such targets.
As you saw, this circularity does not affect the your test target because
it has an explicit recipe and does not employ the rule. But it does provoke
the surprising error:
make: Circular Makefile <- Makefile dependency dropped.
That happens because the first target that make automatically considers is
the makefile itself. Unlike the test target, you have no recipe for
the makefile; so the pattern rule applies to it, making the makefile dependent
on itself.
The Chase
You can achieve what you want by a different approach. In a actual project
it is more than likely that in any makefile you can compute a list of
all possible targets. From this you can generate a corresponding list of
auxiliary targets, say, target => target.prelim, where the
sole purpose of target.prelim is to provoke, when it should and not
otherwise, the required preliminary action for target; and you can get make
to generate a list of order-only rules, target: | target.prelim,
for each target, such that target.prelim will not be considered in determining whether target
must be made, but will be made before target whenever target needs to be made.
Here is an illustration:
SRCS := main.c foo.c
OBJS := $(SRCS:.c=.o)
TARGETS := all prog $(OBJS)
PRELIMS := $(patsubst %,%.prelim,$(TARGETS))
define prelim_rule =
$(1): | $(1).prelim
endef
$(foreach target,$(TARGETS),$(eval $(call prelim_rule,$(target))))
.PHONY: all
all: prog
prog: $(OBJS)
$(CC) $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) -o $# $(OBJS) $(LIBS)
clean:
rm -f $(OBJS) $(PRELIMS) prog
%.prelim:
#echo "Logging target $(#:%.prelim=%)"
#touch $#
And a sample session:
$ make
Logging target all
Logging target main.o
cc -c -o main.o main.c
Logging target foo.o
cc -c -o foo.o foo.c
Logging target prog
cc -o prog main.o foo.o
$ make
make: Nothing to be done for 'all'.
$ make clean
rm -f main.o foo.o all.prelim prog.prelim main.o.prelim foo.o.prelim prog
$ make main.o
Logging target main.o
cc -c -o main.o main.c
$ make main.o
make: 'main.o' is up to date.
$ # A prelim can't out-date its target...
$ touch main.o.prelim
$ make main.o
make: 'main.o' is up to date.
I realise that this isn't answering my question as asked, but it has the effect I want - executing a shell command as late in the Makefile processing as possible.
MYVAR?=foo
.PHONY: test
test:
#echo 'Inside test target'
LOG=$(shell echo 'Logging $(MAKECMDGOALS), myvar=$(MYVAR)' > log)
.SECONDEXPANSION:
force: $$(LOG)
LOG is a deferred variable, so is not expanded until Make evaluates the prerequisite list of the force target.
In a single Makefile, the .SECONDEXPANSION: part is not needed, since the force target is evaluated after MYVAR is set.
However, if I move the LOG variable and force variable into a sub-makefile, it would be easy to include subMakefile before the MYVAR?= line - which would not work.
By specifying .SECONDEXPANSION for force, the reliance on ordering is removed.

GNU Makefile - Pattern rule with multiple targets with one dependency ignores all targets but the first

I want to make a language depend target. In Particular: I have one source-file and I want to create different Objects which where add to the corresponding language folder. That single source file will differ in the C-Flags, the compiler will get. As long as I used it in a static way, it works quite fine.
de/info.o en/info.o es/info.o : info.c
$(ECHO) (DEP) $< for $#
Now I thought, it would be great if it is a bit more dynamic, in case i'll add a new language depending file. So I used a wildcard as followed:
de/%.o en/%.o es/%.o : %.c
$(ECHO) (DEP) $< for $#
But now it just make the first target and ignores the rest. The Make-Debug prints the following thing:
Successfully remade target file `de/info.o'.
Considering target file `en/info.o'.
File `en/info.o' was considered already.
Just in case: No, the objects do not exist. So there is no target, but an existing dependencie, so make should execute the rules.
EDIT: Found a solution for that Problem.
define FOO
$(1)/%.o : %.c
$(ECHO) $$< for $(1)
endef
$(foreach lang,$(LANGUAGE_LIST), $(eval $(call FOO,$(lang))))
Inspired by: http://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/make.html#Eval-Function
Pattern rules work differently than implicit rules. While an implicit rule such as
a b c: d
command
is equivalent to the longer notation
a: d
command
b: d
command
c: d
command
this does NOT hold for pattern rules. Pattern rules with multiple targets are explicitly required to build all of their targets in a single invocation of command. Thus you would have to write
$ cat GNUmakefile
all: de/x.o en/x.o es/x.o
de/%.o: %.c
#echo $# from $<
en/%.o: %.c
#echo $# from $<
es/%.o: %.c
#echo $# from $<
$ gmake
de/x.o from x.c
en/x.o from x.c
es/x.o from x.c
The relevant documentation is found in 10.5.1 Introduction to Pattern Rules of the GNU make manual:
Pattern rules may have more than one target. Unlike normal rules, this does not act as many different rules with the same prerequisites and recipe. If a pattern rule has multiple targets, make knows that the rule’s recipe is responsible for making all of the targets. The recipe is executed only once to make all the targets. When searching for a pattern rule to match a target, the target patterns of a rule other than the one that matches the target in need of a rule are incidental: make worries only about giving a recipe and prerequisites to the file presently in question. However, when this file’s recipe is run, the other targets are marked as having been updated themselves.

Why does Make ignore my wildcard rule?

Why doesn't Make link to foo.o?
$ ls
foo.c foo_test.c Makefile
$ cat Makefile
.PHONY: test
test: foo_test
%_test: %_test.o foo.o
$ make
cc foo_test.c -o foo_test
Pattern rules MUST have a recipe associated with them. Any pattern rule without a recipe tells GNU make to delete that pattern rule. So, your line:
%_test: %_test.o foo.o
does nothing except delete the non-existent pattern rule to build %_test from %_test.o. You need to create a recipe if you want it to take effect:
%_test: %_test.o foo.o
$(CC) -o $# $(LIBS) $^
or whatever. However, this is completely not necessary for your example. You don't need any rule at all for that, just write:
foo_test: foo_test.o foo.o
and let make's built-in rules handle it.

Resources