From:	panic AT diku DOT dk (Arne Glenstrup)
Subject:	Re: gcc produces foo.exe, not foo
24 Sep 1998 16:11:46 -0700 :
Message-ID:	<Pine.HPP.3.95.980924111126.1831B-100000.cygnus.gnu-win32@grimer.diku.dk>
References:	<19980923155818 DOT 46559 AT cygnus DOT com>
Reply-To:	Arne Glenstrup <panic AT diku DOT dk>
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

Now that we have established that we need some (in my opinion) dirty
$(EXEEXT)-stuff, what is the consensus on how to use it with regards to
makefile targets and -o switches to compilers? Should a makefile look
like this:

  EXEEXT = @EXEEXT@

  goal$(EXEEXT): goal.c
                 $(CC) -o goal$(EXEEXT) goal.c
                 cp goal$(EXEEXT) anothergoal$(EXEEXT)
                 mv goal$(EXEEXT) yet.another.goal

or should it look like this:

  EXEEXT = @EXEEXT@

  goal:          goal.c
                 $(CC) -o goal goal.c
                 cp goal$(EXEEXT) anothergoal$(EXEEXT)
                 mv goal$(EXEEXT) yet.another.goal

-- Arne
__________________________________________________________________________
Arne John Glenstrup        | Windows 95: n.  32 bit extensions and a       
panic AT diku DOT dk              |  graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8   
http://www.diku.dk/~panic/ |  bit operating system originally coded for a 4
                              bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company
                              that can't stand 1 bit of competition.


-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".

- Raw text -