GNU bug report logs - #14560
C Compilation variables present in output Makefiles unconditionally

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#14560: closed (C Compilation variables present in output
 Makefiles unconditionally)
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:45:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:44:28 +0200
with message-id <51B8B37C.3090904 <at> gmail.com>
and subject line Re: bug#14560: C Compilation variables present in output Makefiles unconditionally
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #14560,
regarding C Compilation variables present in output Makefiles unconditionally
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
14560: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=14560
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius <at> rtems.org>
Cc: bug-automake <at> gnu.org, Automake List <automake <at> gnu.org>
Subject: C Compilation variables present in output Makefiles unconditionally
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 12:03:15 +0200

[+cc bug-automake, so this will be registered in the bug tracker]

On 06/05/2013 07:16 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 09:14 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>> We are pleased to announce the GNU Automake 1.13.3 maintenance release.
> 
> When comparing automake-1.13.2 generated Makefile.ins against
> automake-1.13.3 generated Makefile.in, in projects which are
> _not_ using "c" I am observing changes like this one below:
> 
> --- a/Makefile.in
> +++ b/Makefile.in
> ...
> @@ -109,6 +109,18 @@ AM_V_at = $(am__v_at_ <at> AM_V@)
>  am__v_at_ = $(am__v_at_ <at> AM_DEFAULT_V@)
>  am__v_at_0 = @
>  am__v_at_1 =
> +COMPILE = $(CC) $(DEFS) $(DEFAULT_INCLUDES) $(INCLUDES) $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
> +       $(CPPFLAGS) $(AM_CFLAGS) $(CFLAGS)
> +AM_V_CC = $(am__v_CC_ <at> AM_V@)
> +am__v_CC_ = $(am__v_CC_ <at> AM_DEFAULT_V@)
> +am__v_CC_0 = @echo "  CC      " $@;
> +am__v_CC_1 =
> +CCLD = $(CC)
> +LINK = $(CCLD) $(AM_CFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(AM_LDFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@
> +AM_V_CCLD = $(am__v_CCLD_ <at> AM_V@)
> +am__v_CCLD_ = $(am__v_CCLD_ <at> AM_DEFAULT_V@)
> +am__v_CCLD_0 = @echo "  CCLD    " $@;
> +am__v_CCLD_1 =
>  SOURCES =
>  DIST_SOURCES =
>  AM_V_DVIPS = $(am__v_DVIPS_ <at> AM_V@)
> ...
>
Yeah, this shouldn't happen.  Not a serious regression thankfully,
but still unpleasant.

> So far, I havn't had sufficient time to implement a simple reproducer,
> but I am inclined to believe, automake-1.13.3 inserts c-compiler
> related vars into Makefile.ins, in cases no C-compiler is being used.
>
Thanks for the report, I'll try to look into this ASAP (might be
few days though).  I already have in mind which set of changes
can be responsible for the regression (that is, those related to
the fixing of automake bug#14441).

Regards,
  Stefano

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattarini <at> gmail.com>
To: Ralf Corsepius <ralf.corsepius <at> rtems.org>
Cc: "automake-patches <at> gnu.org" <automake-patches <at> gnu.org>,
 14560-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#14560: C Compilation variables present in output Makefiles
 unconditionally
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:44:28 +0200

On 06/12/2013 04:14 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 06/12/2013 12:25 PM, Stefano Lattarini wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, this is exactly what I needed, and your diagnosis seems spot-on.
>> I will soon post a couple of patches that should first expose and then
>> fix the issue.
> I gave your patches some "life-testing" - AFAICT so far, they seem to
> resolve the issue. Thanks.
>
OK, thanks for testing.  I will push the patches shortly.  And I'm
closing this bug report.

>> BTW, I notice your e-mail in THANKS might be outdated.
> Yes, this address is outdated for many years ;)
> 
>> Should I replace it with the one you are using recently?
> Yes. I think replacing it with
>  ralf.corsepius <at> gmail.com
> would be appropriate.
>
Will do with a follow-up patch.

Best regards,
  Stefano

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.