Dependency output

Dependency output

[timtuun]

Hi.

I was wondering if there is a particular reason why object name in
dependency output doesn't include the directory where the output is
written? For example when compiling vim version 7.1 I get the following
result.

[timtuun@raimi vim71]$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20070626 (Red Hat 4.1.2-13)

$DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT is set

gcc -c -I. -Iproto -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DFEAT_GUI_GTK  -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0
-I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo
-I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0
-I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/freetype2
-I/usr/include/libpng12     -g -O2         -o objects/buffer.o buffer.c

Produces following in the dependency file:

buffer.o: buffer.c vim.h auto/config.h feature.h os_unix.h auto/osdef.h \
  ascii.h keymap.h term.h macros.h option.h structs.h regexp.h gui.h \
  gui_beval.h /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtkwidget.h ....

Am I completely wrong saying that some older version it would have been
objects/buffer.o: ... instead of just buffer.o: ... ?

Timo

Re: Dependency output

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "timtuun" == timtuun  <timtuun@cc.jyu.fi> writes:

timtuun> I was wondering if there is a particular reason why object
timtuun> name in dependency output doesn't include the directory where
timtuun> the output is written?

Just conservatism -- the options have worked this way for a long time.
See PR 30491.

timtuun> Am I completely wrong saying that some older version it would
timtuun> have been objects/buffer.o: ... instead of just buffer.o:
timtuun> ... ?

Yeah, that would have been a better choice.  I don't know why it was
not done that way.  I'm reluctant to change it, however, for fear of
breaking a script that uses gcc.

Also, it is easy enough to use -MT to get the target name you want.
This is what automake does, for instance.

Tom