You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@apr.apache.org by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> on 2007/10/24 02:12:49 UTC
Re: svn commit: r587694 - /apr/apr/trunk/build/NWGNUmakefile
bnicholes@apache.org wrote:
> Author: bnicholes
> Date: Tue Oct 23 16:27:15 2007
> New Revision: 587694
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=587694&view=rev
> Log:
> Allow the dependent .hw files in the include/private directory to be processed as well.
> @@ -65,6 +65,10 @@
> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
>
> +$(APRUTIL)/include/private/%.h: $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\%.hw
> + @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
> + copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
> +
> $(APRUTIL)/xml/expat/lib/%.h: $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\%.hnw
> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\$(@F)
Silly question, but if both exist, which rule wins?
Re: svn commit: r587694 - /apr/apr/trunk/build/NWGNUmakefile
Posted by Brad Nicholes <BN...@novell.com>.
>>> On 10/23/2007 at 6:12 PM, in message <47...@rowe-clan.net>, "William
A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> bnicholes@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: bnicholes
>> Date: Tue Oct 23 16:27:15 2007
>> New Revision: 587694
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=587694&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Allow the dependent .hw files in the include/private directory to be
> processed as well.
>
>> @@ -65,6 +65,10 @@
>> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
>>
>> +$(APRUTIL)/include/private/%.h: $(subst
> /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\%.hw
>> + @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> + copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
>> +
>> $(APRUTIL)/xml/expat/lib/%.h: $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\%.hnw
>> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\$(@F)
>
> Silly question, but if both exist, which rule wins?
In this case they both do. The makefile is just copying code bits into a single ap_config.h. The code bits are surrounded by #ifdef WIN32 or #ifdef NETWARE. So the fact that both ap_config.hw and ap_config.hnw exist and both are copied, the result does the right thing.
Brad
Re: svn commit: r587694 - /apr/apr/trunk/build/NWGNUmakefile
Posted by Brad Nicholes <BN...@novell.com>.
>>> On 10/23/2007 at 6:12 PM, in message <47...@rowe-clan.net>, "William
A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> bnicholes@apache.org wrote:
>> Author: bnicholes
>> Date: Tue Oct 23 16:27:15 2007
>> New Revision: 587694
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=587694&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Allow the dependent .hw files in the include/private directory to be
> processed as well.
>
>> @@ -65,6 +65,10 @@
>> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
>>
>> +$(APRUTIL)/include/private/%.h: $(subst
> /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\%.hw
>> + @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> + copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\include\private\$(@F)
>> +
>> $(APRUTIL)/xml/expat/lib/%.h: $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\%.hnw
>> @echo Creating $(subst /,\,$@)
>> copy $< $(subst /,\,$(APRUTIL))\xml\expat\lib\$(@F)
>
> Silly question, but if both exist, which rule wins?
In this case they both do. The makefile is just copying code bits into a single ap_config.h. The code bits are surrounded by #ifdef WIN32 or #ifdef NETWARE. So the fact that both ap_config.hw and ap_config.hnw exist and both are copied, the result does the right thing.
Brad