Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:39:56 +1000 (EST) From: Ian Holland <ianh@tortuga.com.au> To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: src Makefile fix Message-ID: <199806120639.QAA17212@frabjous.tortuga.com.au> In-Reply-To: <199806111056.UAA03420@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from Bruce Evans at "Jun 11, 98 08:56:42 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Bruce Evans enscribed:
>
> This makes the extra build step look non-ugly :-).
So that means we can have the extra build step? ;-)
>
> I don't see how this actually works - it doesn't rename y.tab.h. This
> slightly broken version can be achieved using existing compatibility cruft
> (y.tab.h in SRCS) instead of YACCOPY. -o is not used when the applcation
> wants y.tab.h instead of foo.h created from foo.y since foo.h might
> (and in practice, does) conflict with a source file. lex/Makefile can
> explot this and rename (actually, copy) y.tab.h itself:
I was basing the functionality on the yacc man page:
-o output_filename
Cause yacc to write the generated code to output_filename instead
of the default file, y.tab.c.
Another problem is that it'll try to "mv" the generated .c even if the
"yacc" failed. As we both agree, it is not nice.
Shall I sit back and patiently await a good fix, or continue the hunt?
--
Ian Holland In a world without fences,
ianh@tortuga.com.au Who needs Gates?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806120639.QAA17212>