This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 24 Jun 2016 20:01, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 06/24/2016 07:49 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 24 Jun 2016 18:31, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> On 06/24/2016 06:10 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>> On 24 Jun 2016 13:24, Florian Weimer wrote: > >>>> On 06/11/2016 12:27 AM, Roland McGrath wrote: > >>>>> eval is a pretty horrible feature and I'd probably object to introducing > >>>>> any uses of it into libc's makefiles. We already have lots of things that > >>>>> might have been done that way, but are instead done with generated makefiles. > >>>> > >>>> I would like to put this into malloc/Makefile: > >>>> > >>>> $(foreach t,$(tests),$(eval CFLAGS-$t.c += -DTEST_NO_MALLOPT)) > >>>> > >>>> What's the alternative for adding a -D flag to every test compilation in > >>>> a subdirectory? > >>> > >>> maybe something like (untested): > >>> CPPFLAGS += $(if $(filter $(@F),$(tests)),-DTEST_NO_MALLOPT) > >> > >> Hmm, right. It's relying on the delayed expansion. Not sure how this > >> is less evil, though. It also has at least quadratic run-time behavior. > > > > what about using target-specific variables and relying on inheritance [1] ? > > does this work ? > > $(tests): CPPFLAGS += ... > > It would have to be something like: > > $(tests:%=$(objpfx)%.o): CPPFLAGS += -DTEST_NO_MALLOPT did you verify that ? target-specific variables inherit across targets. example: $ cat Makefile tests = a check: $(tests) $(tests): CPPFLAGS += FOO a: a.o a.o: echo $(CPPFLAGS) false $ make echo FOO FOO ... -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |