Re: [bakefile-devel] Subprojetc question.

Hi,

Hans Van Leemputten wrote:
> Before mailing here I already reported a bakefile bug on the
> wxWindows SF page, should I duplicate it on the bakefile SF page as
> it is not specific to wxWin?

Yes, please. BTW, I think it's not specific to Watcom...

> No I understand (well I think I do) what subproject is for and what
> the bakefile exe,lib,dll rule is for. The first version of my
> bakefile did it the way you suggest above, but there are some
> problems doing it this way: 
> - The guidelib and demo dsp file will
> both be in the demo directory. 

On the contrary, if you use a subproject, there will be two makefiles. 
That's the very point of subprojects.

> - [I'm not sure the next issue is true, I don't remember correctly]
> Because of the above issue also the object files etc get put into
> the sample directory... meaning a rebuild is needed form the
> guidelib for every application using it. A lot of space wasted...

No, this is not true, object files are put into the directory where 
the makefile is (unles overriden by you).

> * Because both the exe and the lib bakefile included the common
> part and the exe bakefile included the lib bakefile it gave parse
> errors (bakefile couldn't handle me defining the same set of
> options again).

Yes, but that makes sense, doesn't it? But I don't see why are you 
including the common parts twice (this is not caused by using 
<subproject>). Are you sure you are not using <include> instead of 
<subproject> by mistake?

> *Also if I include a bakefile that has a list of files relative to
> that bakefile in it I would end-up with wrong file paths. For
> example if the master bakefile is not in the same directory as the
> sub bakefile the files will not be found...

The filenames are relative to SRCDIR.

> So that is why I want to use subproject instead of what you
> suggest. But as I already reported this is OK for the makefiles but
> not for the MSVC6prj files. Any other suggestions?

No.

> Aha ok. I did some googling around and found-out the following that
> may help: - The borland make file could use PUSHD and POPD command
> to change directory. Unfortunately this will only work on NT based
> systems.

...and so I cannot use it.

> - Another dirty workaround would be to output a batch file that
> does the following (note: not very well tested!)
>
> guidelib:
>     @echo cd ..\.. > %temp%\$<.bat
>     @echo $(MAKE) -f makefile.bcc $(MAKEARGS) all >> %temp%\$<.bat
>     call %temp%\$<.bat
>     @del %temp%\$<.bat

You're right, it _is_ dirty ;) It could work as last resolt, but let 
me repeat once again that <subproject> should be used with 
subdirectories only.

> BTW. Would it be possible to also foresee a clean rule for the
> subprojects? I was thinking of a cleanall or veryclean rule... just
> so there is a way to do clean action for all subprojects as well.

"make clean" does that.

Regards,
Vaclav

-- 
PGP key: 0x465264C9, available from http://pgp.mit.edu/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBAIqTMxDYa/UZSZMkRArrBAKCE9z638juQ6eovqbxnCyq2zyjxUACfXINg
MUKZjI9TP1zxDG/IK3KtXSI=
=8N6c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----