🚀 go-pugleaf

Alex Vinokur wrote:

> I am using GNU make.
> 
> Can I write in makefile dependencies as following :
> xxx.o : *.h
> instead of
> xxx.o: aaa.h bbb.h
> ?

	What would that mean? Which header files?

	DS

In article <3AF90198.CE0A2ED8@webmaster.com>,
 David Schwartz <davids@webmaster.com> writes:
>> I am using GNU make.
>> 
>> Can I write in makefile dependencies as following :
>> xxx.o : *.h
>> instead of
>> xxx.o: aaa.h bbb.h
>> ?
>
>	What would that mean? Which header files?

Um, it would mean all of the files which match the wildcard, i.e., all
the header files in the directory, obviously.  In other words,
"Rebuild this object if any of the header files changes."

To answer the original poster's question, yes, in GNU Make you can use
wildcards in dependencies, but you need to make sure that at least one
file matching the wildcard actually exists, or you'll get an error. 
For example:

/tmp> mkdir test-make
/tmp> cd test-make
/tmp/test-make> cat > Makefile
foo: *.h
	touch foo
/tmp/test-make> make foo
make: *** No rule to make target `*.h', needed by `foo'.  Stop.
/tmp/test-make> touch a.h
/tmp/test-make> make foo
touch foo
/tmp/test-make> make foo
make: `foo' is up to date.
/tmp/test-make> touch b.h
/tmp/test-make> make foo
touch foo
/tmp/test-make> make foo
make: `foo' is up to date.
/tmp/test-make> touch a.h
/tmp/test-make> make foo
touch foo
/tmp/test-make> make foo
make: `foo' is up to date.
/tmp/test-make> 

You can alo use $(wildcard *.h) instead of *.h in your dependency, in
which case you won't get an error if there aren't any *.h files:

/tmp/test-make> cat > Makefile2
foo: $(wildcard *.h)
        touch foo
/tmp/test-make> rm *.h
/tmp/test-make> make -f Makefile2 foo
make: `foo' is up to date.
/tmp/test-make> touch a.h
/tmp/test-make> make -f Makefile2 foo
touch foo
/tmp/test-make> make -f Makefile2 foo
make: `foo' is up to date.
/tmp/test-make> 

David Schwartz wrote:

> Alex Vinokur wrote:
>
> > I am using GNU make.
> >
> > Can I write in makefile dependencies as following :
> > xxx.o : *.h
> > instead of
> > xxx.o: aaa.h bbb.h
> > ?
>
>         What would that mean? Which header files?
>
>         DS

I mean that there are two header files only : aaa.h and bbb.h.

==================================
Alex Vinokur
   mailto:alexvn@bigfoot.com
   http://up.to/alexvn
   http://visitweb.com/alexvn.math
==================================

Alex Vinokur wrote:

> I am using GNU make.
> 
> Can I write in makefile dependencies as following :
> xxx.o : *.h
> instead of
> xxx.o: aaa.h bbb.h
> ?

GNU make has the wildcard builtin:

xxx.o: $(wildcard *.h)

-- 
 Erik Max Francis / max@alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, US / 37 20 N 121 53 W / ICQ16063900 / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ I just want to create my own life.  I can just be me.
\__/ Ekene Nwokoye
    REALpolitik / http://www.realpolitik.com/
 Get your own customized newsfeed online in realtime ... for free!

In article <3AF9643D.98B1A864@alcyone.com>,
 Erik Max Francis <max@alcyone.com> writes:
>GNU make has the wildcard builtin:
>
>xxx.o: $(wildcard *.h)

But, as I wrote in another message, it also allows dependencies to be
direct wildcards without wrapping them in $(wildcard ...).

David Schwartz wrote:

> Alex Vinokur wrote:
>
> > I am using GNU make.
> >
> > Can I write in makefile dependencies as following :
> > xxx.o : *.h
> > instead of
> > xxx.o: aaa.h bbb.h
> > ?
>
>         What would that mean? Which header files?
>
>         DS

generally you can.  I do not know what you want to acchieve but yes you
can specify wildcard dependencies

W