Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
RE: [cdt-dev] Re: Dependencies for post-build step

Hi Delicia,


> Would it be a 'not-so-wise' idea for me to make a hack in 3.0.2?

In case you are interested in “incremental” behavior only for the pre/post build steps, then it might not be very difficult to modify the 3.0 branch to support it, although if you want to take advantage of the “incremental” behavior for all MBS properties then it might be easier to migrate to 3.1.

From the MBS perspective migration should not be a problem since the 3.1 MBS schema is actually the extended 3.0 one, so all 3.0 integrations should work with 3.1 as well.




From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Delicia
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:42 AM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cdt-dev] Re: Dependencies for post-build step


Hi Mikhail,


  I'm using an earlier release - CDT version 3.0.2

Looks like it's been fixed on the main branch (and 3.1?)

Would it be a 'not-so-wise' idea for me to make a hack in 3.0.2?


I guess I should consider migrating to 3.1

Is there some article/documentation on what I need to consider/take care of while migrating?

(I looked on but couldn't find it).





Message: 3
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 16:39:06 +0400
From: "Sennikovsky, Mikhail" <mikhail.sennikovsky@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] Dependencies for post-build step
To: "CDT General developers list." <cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Delicia,

What CDT version are you using?
I do not get a full rebuild when I modify a post-build step with the CDT
sources from HEAD.



From: cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Delicia
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 4:28 PM
To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [cdt-dev] Dependencies for post-build step


  I have a managed make C project (executable), which has successfully built.
I make a small modification to the post-build step and get:

**** Full rebuild of configuration Debug for project CDT_hello ****
make -k clean all 

Shouldn't the post-build step be "incremental", and not do a clean rebuild?

I looked at the generated makefile, it has:
# All Target
all: CDT_hello.exe

# Tool invocations
CDT_hello.exe: $(OBJS) $(USER_OBJS)
 $(MAKE) --no-print-directory post-build


Shouldn't it rather be:
all: CDT_hello.exe post-build

# Tool invocations
CDT_hello.exe: $(OBJS) $(USER_OBJS)

post-build: CDT_hello.exe

Also, "post-build" is listed as a SECONDARY target, not sure on the
implications of this part.

Back to the top