Talking with respect to GNU make, what is the difference between PHONY targets all: and default:.
CC=g++
default: hello
hello: hello.cpp
$(CC) -o hello hello.cpp
and
CC=g++
all: hello
hello: hello.cpp
$(CC) -o hello hello.cpp
Both of them do the same job.
You can call them shirley if you like; neither of the labels you mention has any special semantics. The default behavior of make is to run the first target in the Makefile if you don't specify a target as a command-line argument. If you like to override this behavior, there is the .DEFAULT: special target.
There is a convention to have a target named all which builds everything, but this is just human convention, not a special case or a requirement as far as Make is concerned.
Similarly, there is a (weak) convention to call the default target default, but similarly, this is just a human label (and somewhat overlaps and possibly conflicts with the all convention).
So the following Makefile does exactly the same thing:
.PHONY: shirley all default
default: hello
all: hello
shirley: hello
hello: hello.cpp
# (Make already knows how to build an executable out of a .cpp file)
You can omit any or all of the phony targets above, and the only difference will be that humans won't be able to say make shirley when they (effectively) mean make hello.
Bottom line: Construct your Makefile so that make does what a reasonable end-user expects without reading too much README files or inspecting the Makefile. Often that will be make all (and you should probably have a target with this name, just to satisfy human conventions, even if it's not the default) but this obviously depends on your project and your users' expectations.
Don't call me Shirley.
The only difference, is that all is recommended in the GNU Make manual, to be the first (default) target, and default has no such special recommendation.
One is spelled "all" and the other is spelled "default". There's no other difference between them. Maybe if you explained why you're asking we'd be able to help more.
Note that in your example above neither of the targets are actually phony. You'd have to declare them as such:
.PHONY: all
etc.
Related
I have these recipes in my Makefile. They generate cross-compiled objects for ARM architecture and link them into an elf binary:
%.ao: %.c
$(ARM_CC) $(ARM_CPPFLAGS) $(ARM_FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) -c -o $# $<
%.elf: %.ao startup_stm32f0xx.ao system_stm32f0xx.ao
$(ARM_CC) $(ARM_FLAGS) $other_arguments -o $# $^
This works fine from a clean build.
Contrary to my expectation, if I then say touch foo.c; make foo.elf, gmake responds with
make: 'foo.elf' is up to date.
If I try to make foo.ao, gmake says that it, too , is up to date.
What am I missing?
Edit after reading the comments:
TLDR: I did have multiple rules matching the same target, as John Bollinger alluded and HardcoreHenry said specifically.
In addition to the rules above, there's a rule for assembly sources so I can use those vendor files:
%.ao: %.s
$(ARM_CC) $(ARM_CPPFLAGS) $(ARM_FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) -c -o $# $<
I had been debugging some macros, and used -save-temps to look at preprocessor output. This option also writes .s files. So after I'd run make foo.elf, I'd have the following in my directory:
foo.c
foo.i
foo.s
foo.ao
foo.elf
I can touch foo.c, but make sees that there's a foo.s which is older than foo.ao, and produces the output that it does. On a clean build, there is no foo.s, so make finds the %.c:%.ao rule and the build proceeds from foo.c.
(BTW, .ao stands for ARM object. In addition to cross-compiling for AMR, I compile many of the sources to run unit tests on the host, using the built-in .o:.c rule)
I'm not a fan of pattern rules.
Make can make very strange decisions on which rules apply depending on whatever is lying around on your hard disks.
It's all a bit arbitrary.
Much better IMHO to tell make exactly what files you need for a target.
It's pretty easy too.
Just prefix your pattern rule with the list of targets you actually want it to apply to.
This makes it a Static Pattern Rule.
objects := main.ao tools.ao devices.ao# etc
${objects}: %.ao: %.c
$(ARM_CC) $(ARM_CPPFLAGS) $(ARM_FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) -c -o $# $<
%.elf: ${objects} startup_stm32f0xx.ao system_stm32f0xx.ao
$(ARM_CC) $(ARM_FLAGS) $other_arguments -o $# $^
As an added bonus, make now won't try to create the pre-existing startup_stm32f0xx.ao and system_stm32f0xx.ao.
Usually I find it nicer to list the source files, but YMMV:
sources := main.c tools.c devices.c
objects := $(patsubst $.c,%.ao,${sources})
(P.S. Using a Static Pattern Rule doesn't really give you any advantage over a normal rule in this noddy case. I just wanted to show a small tweak that would make your makefiles much more consistent in their behaviour.)
I know it's bad form to use an answer to respond to another answer, but I ran out of space in a comment to #bobbogo's answer.
Sorry but I can't agree with your assessment of pattern rules. It's not true that you will get "strange decisions" based on "whatever is lying around on your harddisks", and it's certainly not arbitrary.
There is one advantage of static pattern rules over pattern rules, and that is also its downside: a static pattern rule is a shorthand for creating an explicit rule, so that rule will always be used to build that target. A pattern rule, on the other hand, is just one possible way to build a target: if the prerequisites of a pattern rule don't exist and can't be made, then make keeps going and looks for other pattern rules that might be able to build that target.
So if you have multiple possible ways you can build a target then an explicit rule cannot be used for that.
The problem with pattern rules is that if NO pattern rule applies then make just assumes there is no rule to build that target. If the target exists then make simply says "up to date" (as we see in the question) since there's no rule to build it. That can be confusing to users.
If you use an explicit rule (including a static pattern rule) and some prerequisite doesn't exist and can't be created, then make will exit with an error, which can make it easier to figure out what went wrong.
Im trying to run this simple makefile commands but get the error - 'Nothing to be done for 'all''
FILES = file1.c file2.c file3.c
all:test
test:
for file in $(FILES);
do
echo $$file;
done
The target test has no dependencies and therefore no reason to be built, which is inherited by the target all. It has instructions, but it should include FILES as its prerequisites. What you're doing appears to be ingredients-first, but test is the target. Working backwards is what make is best at. You may benefit from an article called "Auto-Dependency Generation" which takes the opposite approach (you appear to think like I do.)
test: $(FILES)
Then you could do something like the following:
$(FILES:.o:.c): %.o: %.c
$(CC) -c -o $# $<
The first part is a set of possible targets, the list of objects corresponding to the list of sources, and the second is a specific but nameless object (it will assume the name of the corresponding source.) Later on, the target, e.g. test, can be the name of your executable taking these objects as both dependencies and objects to link statically. For my purposes I typically use shared libraries but this is irrelevant to the question at hand.
Edit: untested, will revise if issues ensue
Note: using MinGW's make (should be GNU make)
i have a couple of -include statements in my makefile to import dependencies which were generated using g++ -MM. However I would like to only do this when necessary. I have several different build targets and I don't want all of their respective dependency files to be included since this takes a while (suppose I'm running make clean: no need to include them in this case)
Here's the format of my makefile.
DEPS_debug = $(patsubst %.cpp,build_debug/%.d,$(SRC))
OBJ_debug = $(patsubst %.cpp,build_debug/%.o,$(SRC))
all: program_debug
-include $(DEPS_debug) #make: include: Command not found
program_debug: $(OBJ_debug)
$(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(OBJ_debug) -o $#
If you really don't want to include those files needlessly, you have a couple of options:
You can put in a conditional as Diego Sevilla suggests (but I would recommend using MAKECMDGOALS so that you can write a more flexible version, specific to targets, e.g. you'll include foo.d if and only if you're making foo.o).
You can use make recursively (heresy!), invoking $(MAKE) for each target object, using a makefile that includes that target's dependencies.
But actually including the file takes negligible time, it's the rebuilding of the file (automatic for any included file that's out of date) that takes time.
If needless rebuilding is what you want to avoid, you can use a very clever trick. When must foo.d be rebuilt? Only when something about foo has changed. But in that case foo.o must also be rebuilt. So don't have a seperate rule for foo.d, just rebuild it as a side effect of making foo.o. That way you can include all dependency files and not waste time rebuilding them if they aren't needed.
EDIT:
I'm astounded that merely including these files can add 2-3 seconds to make clean. My last paragraph is off the mark, so let me expand on the first two options.
If all is the only target for which these files should be included, and you make all from the command line (and not e.g. make all tests tarball install kitchenSink), then this will do it:
ifeq ($(MAKECMDGOALS),all)
-include $(DEPS_debug)
endif
Note that this will not include foo.d if you make foo.o. You can write a more sophisticated conditional, something like
$(foreach targ,$(MAKECMDGOALS),$(eval $(call include_deps $(targ)))...
but that's pretty advanced, so let's get a simple version working first.
If you'd rather avoid the conditional and use recursive Make, the simplest way is to split the makefile in two:
makefile:
all:
$(MAKE) -f makefile.all
clean:
rm whatever
...other rules
makefile.all:
DEPS_debug = $(patsubst %.cpp,build_debug/%.d,$(SRC))
OBJ_debug = $(patsubst %.cpp,build_debug/%.o,$(SRC))
-include $(DEPS_debug)
all: program_debug
program_debug: $(OBJ_debug)
$(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(OBJ_debug) -o $#
Indenting a line by a TAB makes make think it's a command to be passed to the shell (as you found out). It doesn't work that way.
The - in front of include suppresses errors that might result from DEPS_debug not existing (e.g. when running clean or release without having had a dependency-file-generating call first). Since DEPS_debug is not a dependency of those rules (clean / release), your dependency files do not get generated when you call them, and everything is fine. I don't really see the problem you're having - you don't have to make the include conditional.
Perhaps you'd like to change your approach, though. Instead of having a seperate *.d target, with a seperate -M preprocessor pass, you might want to try something like -MMD -MP which generates the dependency files inline during code generation, in your standard *.c -> *.o pass.
(I know this sounds completely wrong at first, but when you think about it, it makes sense. Makefile logic is a bit backwards that way, unless you're familiar with functional programming.)
includes are independent of the rules, as they are makefile indications, not compilation indications. You can, however, use makefile conditionals based on special makefile variables such as MAKECMDGOALS, that is set to the default goal:
ifeq ($(MAKECMDGOALS),all)
-include whatever
endif
This is included when no default goal is specified. You can change the condition to specify the exact goal you want to check to include other sub-makefiles.
When I change a Makefile, its rules may have changed, so they should be reevaluated, but make doesn't seem to think so.
Is there any way to say, in a Makefile, that all of its targets, no matter which, depend on the Makefile itself?
(Regardless of its name.)
I'm using GNU make.
This looks like one more simple, useful, logical thing that Make should be able to do, but isn't.
Here is a workaround. If the clean rule is set up correctly, Make can execute it whenever the makefile has been altered, using an empty dummy file as a marker.
-include dummy
dummy: Makefile
#touch $#
#$(MAKE) -s clean
This will work for most targets, that is targets that are actual files and that are removed by clean, and any targets that depend on them. Side-effect targets and some PHONY targets will slip through the net.
Since GNU make version 4.3 it is now possible with the use of those two special variable:
.EXTRA_PREREQS
To add new prerequisite to every target
MAKEFILE_LIST
To get the path of the make file
To have every target depend on the current make file:
Put near the top of the file (before any include since it would affect the MAKEFILE_LIST) the following line:
.EXTRA_PREREQS:= $(abspath $(lastword $(MAKEFILE_LIST)))
To have every target depend on the current make file and also the make files which were included
Put the following line at the end of your file:
.EXTRA_PREREQS+=$(foreach mk, ${MAKEFILE_LIST},$(abspath ${mk}))
The only answer I know to this is to add makefile explicitly to the dependencies. For example,
%.o: %.c makefile
$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -c $<
Is there a mechanism in make to allow for default global implicit rules that are available anywhere, similar to the built-in rules?
Make provides some built-inimplicit rules for compiling C/C++/Fortran files, without even requiring a Makefile for simple cases. However, when compiling other languages (e.g. Go programming language files), a Makefile is always required. I would like to extend my Makeenvironment to have implicit rules available by default.
This is not normally desirable, as it would cause your Makefile to be less portable; it wouldn't work on somebody else's machine if they didn't have it set up that way.
However, if you want to do this, create a "global" Makefile somewhere with your default rules for Go files, then add its path to the MAKEFILES environment variable. This global Makefile will be processed before any Makefile when you run "make", just as if you had included its source at the top of the file.
I'm assuming you're referring to the fact that you can do
make hello.o
and make will automatically know how to make the .o from a .c file (or indeed from a .f or .p, if one exists) - but you want to do this for custom file types (say, building a .bar from a .foo.
The most portable way of doing this is as follows (in your Makefile):
.SUFFIXES: .foo .bar
.foo.bar:
foo2bar -in $> -out $#
The first line (.SUFFIXES) warns make that you'll be treating these as special suffixes; the second line says "here's a recipe for making a .bar from a .foo. The third line gives the command for doing this - $> and $# get changed by make to the input and output filenames.
NOTE: The indent for the third line MUST be a tab character.
A much more flexible method, that only works with GNU make, is to use its support for implicit rules. If you can guarantee you'll be using GNU make then this is probably to be recommended.
While I agree with dmazzoni, I just though I'd add my make recipe for a Go Makefile:
# Include default Golang Make magic
include $(GOROOT)/src/Make.$(GOARCH)
# Hack the following line
your_program: your_program.$O
$(LD) -o $# $^
# Compiles .go-files into architecture-specific binaries
%.$O: %.go
$(GC) -o $# $^
clean:
rm your_program *.$O
(Note: the $O is DOLLAR + UPPERCASE-o - not zero!)
While I haven't tested it on all the machines I have available, i believe it should port fairly well.