llvm dev - Jan 2010 - [LLVMdev] make fails to detect changes in case srcdir != objdir

On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 11:30:41AM -0600, David Greene
wrote:
> > I've managed to get my pass listed in 'opt -help' only
after removing opt
> > subdir from objdir and running make again. Re-configuring LLVM also
does
> 
> It sounds like the dependencies for your pass are not correct.  Where
> did you put it in the LLVM tree and how did you change the Makefiles?
One new .cpp file in lib/Transforms/IPO + RegisterPass<> + mention pass in
LinkAllPasses.h; no changes in makefiles.
> > not trigger rebuild when running make, e.g. after initial
'configure
> > --enable-targets=x86' I've managed to get C backend only after
removing
> > objdir and re-configuring (was too lazy to check if 'make
clean' is
> > sufficient).
> 
> A non-build after reconfigure is not really a problem.  If nothing in
> the configuration has changed configure is smart enough not to update
> anything so make doesn't see any changes.
Yes, but in my case support for new targets should be built in.

It is entirely possible that I've screwed something up, although I've
tried to
follow LLVM docs as closely as possible. LLVM build system is really not the
nicest part of LLVM :-)

	Gregory

On Tuesday 05 January 2010 12:18, Gregory Petrosyan wrote:
> > It sounds like the dependencies for your pass are not correct.  Where
> > did you put it in the LLVM tree and how did you change the Makefiles?
>
> One new .cpp file in lib/Transforms/IPO + RegisterPass<> + mention
pass in
> LinkAllPasses.h; no changes in makefiles.
Hmm, that should certainly work.  What file are you touching that make
doesn't seem to pick up?
> > A non-build after reconfigure is not really a problem.  If nothing in
> > the configuration has changed configure is smart enough not to update
> > anything so make doesn't see any changes.
>
> Yes, but in my case support for new targets should be built in.
What do you mean?
> It is entirely possible that I've screwed something up, although
I've tried
> to follow LLVM docs as closely as possible. LLVM build system is really not
> the nicest part of LLVM :-)
That's true, but that's autoconf's fault, not LLVM's.  :)

                              -Dave

On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 01:05:56PM -0600, David Greene
wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 January 2010 12:18, Gregory Petrosyan wrote:
> 
> > > It sounds like the dependencies for your pass are not correct. 
Where
> > > did you put it in the LLVM tree and how did you change the
Makefiles?
> >
> > One new .cpp file in lib/Transforms/IPO + RegisterPass<> +
mention pass in
> > LinkAllPasses.h; no changes in makefiles.
> 
> Hmm, that should certainly work.  What file are you touching that make
> doesn't seem to pick up?
Sorry, can't tell you that now: I've switched to srcdir == objdir
configuration.
> > > A non-build after reconfigure is not really a problem.  If
nothing in
> > > the configuration has changed configure is smart enough not to
update
> > > anything so make doesn't see any changes.
> >
> > Yes, but in my case support for new targets should be built in.
> 
> What do you mean?
I've done these:

	1) configure --enable-targets=x86
	2) make
	3) configure --enable-targets=all
	4) make

and after it I still did not had e.g. C backend.
> > It is entirely possible that I've screwed something up, although
I've tried
> > to follow LLVM docs as closely as possible. LLVM build system is
really not
> > the nicest part of LLVM :-)
> 
> That's true, but that's autoconf's fault, not LLVM's.  :)
And what was the reason for picking autoconf?

	Gregory