[NTLUG:Discuss] makefile guidance..

[don]

No, but I have thought of that.  We have one part of the project that 
has to be compiled with gcc and another part that has to be compiled 
with g++.  It has to be this way for reasons I can't go into.  That's 
why everything has to be contained within the the makefiles and 
specified with a "make tgt=<platform> <all/alldebug/allnodebug> ".  

Don

George E. Lass wrote:

> I *think* you can just pass the compiler into the makefile:
> 
> make CC=gcc -g -Wall (and don't forget -Werror)
> 
> --or--
> 
> make CC=g++ -g .......
> 
> 
> This *should* override the the CC= whatever that is contained in the 
> makefile itself.  Is this what you want to do?
> 
> 
> george
> 
> don wrote:
> 
>> Any one have any insight of how to structure a makefile to produce a
>> non-debug executable and a debug executable ?  I could do this in a
>> brute force option, but I was wondering if anyone has any tricks up
>> his/her sleeve they'd like to share.   Using -d on the command line
>> isn't really an option due to the size and existing setup of the project.
>> 
>> Currently, we have to do "make tgt=xxx all" to build all the
>> executables.  I'd like to modify it so that the target "all" is
>> unchanged,  and add a "alldebug" and "allnodebug" option.  We currently
>> have to define the compilers as such :
>> 
>> $CC = gcc -g -Wall ...
>> $CXX = g++ -g -Wall....
>> 
>> and cannot change this either.
>> 
>> Any suggestions ?  I have a few ideas, but would be interested  in what
>> y'all have to say.
>> 
>> Thanks in advance,
>> Don
> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ntlug.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20010424/4f4ed558/attachment.html