archy-linux
/
archy-slstatus
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
archy-slstatus/Makefile

83 lines
2.2 KiB
Makefile
Raw Normal View History

Refactor build system
2017-08-10 19:32:10 +00:00
.POSIX:
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
include config.mk
Rewrite Makefile to accomodate file split
2017-09-17 15:12:44 +00:00
REQ = util
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
COM = \
components/battery \
components/cpu \
components/datetime \
components/disk \
components/entropy \
components/hostname \
components/ip \
components/kernel_release \
components/keyboard_indicators \
components/keymap \
components/load_avg \
components/netspeeds \
components/num_files \
components/ram \
components/run_command \
components/separator \
components/swap \
components/temperature \
components/uptime \
components/user \
components/volume \
Revert component-split this reverts the commits from 92ab9ef52ebcb097add97d9f78e67ad1c1d6a6ec up to d42870d6ca7fb587b38f8cf6d6821ae33a53a696. After heavy consideration, the component split has more disadvantages than advantages, especially given there will be utility-functions sharing quite a lot of code that would then need to be duplicated, as it does not fit into the util.c due to its speciality. One big advantage of the component-wise build is readability, and without doubt, this was achieved here. This point will be addressed with a different approach that will be visible in the upcoming commits. One big disadvantage of the component build is the fact that it introduces state to the build process which is not necessary. Before its introduction, the only influencing factors where the system-defines __linux__ and __OpenBSD__. With the components, we are also relying on the output of uname(1). Additionally, if the os.mk is not present, make gives the output $ make Makefile:5: os.mk: No such file or directory make: *** No rule to make target 'os.mk'. Stop. This could easily be fixed by providing some sort of meta-rule for this file, however, it indicates the problem we have here, and this entire statefulness will heavily complicate packaging of this tool and makes the build process much more complex than it actually has to be.
2018-05-01 16:10:39 +00:00
components/wifi
Makefile: separate default flags from user flags
2018-04-30 14:11:45 +00:00
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
BUILD_DIR = build
OBJ_DIR = $(BUILD_DIR)/obj
SRC_DIR = src
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
COM_OBJ = $(COM:%=$(OBJ_DIR)/%.o)
REQ_OBJ = $(REQ:%=$(OBJ_DIR)/%.o)
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
SLSTATUS_OBJ = $(OBJ_DIR)/archy_slstatus.o
Explicitly list component-objects in the Makefile There was a long tinkering process at farbfeld about this, but the sad truth is that it's the only way to make the Makefile truly portable. Listing it just as $(COM:=.o): config.mk $(REQ:=.h) omits the dependency on the c-file itself, which incurs that strictly speaking the object file is not depending on the source file, which is nonsense. You don't see strictly Posix compliant Makefiles around very often and most use nasty GNU-extensions everywhere. It is a good idea to go ahead as a fitting example and show how to write them portably.
2018-05-27 20:40:00 +00:00
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
all: $(BUILD_DIR)/archy-slstatus
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
$(COM_OBJ): $(OBJ_DIR)/%.o : $(SRC_DIR)/%.c $(REQ_OBJ) config.mk $(REQ:%=$(SRC_DIR)/%.h)
@mkdir -p $(@D)
$(CC) -o $@ -c $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $<
$(REQ_OBJ): $(OBJ_DIR)/%.o : $(SRC_DIR)/%.c $(SRC_DIR)/%.h
@mkdir -p $(@D)
$(CC) -o $@ -c $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $<
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
$(SLSTATUS_OBJ): $(SRC_DIR)/archy_slstatus.c $(SRC_DIR)/archy_slstatus.h $(SRC_DIR)/arg.h config.mk $(REQ_OBJ) $(REQ:%=$(SRC_DIR)/%.h)
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
@mkdir -p $(@D)
Explicitly list component-objects in the Makefile There was a long tinkering process at farbfeld about this, but the sad truth is that it's the only way to make the Makefile truly portable. Listing it just as $(COM:=.o): config.mk $(REQ:=.h) omits the dependency on the c-file itself, which incurs that strictly speaking the object file is not depending on the source file, which is nonsense. You don't see strictly Posix compliant Makefiles around very often and most use nasty GNU-extensions everywhere. It is a good idea to go ahead as a fitting example and show how to write them portably.
2018-05-27 20:40:00 +00:00
$(CC) -o $@ -c $(CPPFLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $<
Rewrite Makefile to accomodate file split
2017-09-17 15:12:44 +00:00
Fix missing config.h in Makefile
2017-09-17 20:31:26 +00:00
config.h:
cp config.def.h $@
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
$(BUILD_DIR)/archy-slstatus: $(SLSTATUS_OBJ) $(COM_OBJ) $(REQ_OBJ)
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
$(CC) -o $@ $(LDFLAGS) $(SLSTATUS_OBJ) $(COM_OBJ) $(REQ_OBJ) $(LDLIBS)
Makefile: Fixes #35
2017-01-09 07:24:26 +00:00
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
clean:
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
rm -rf $(BUILD_DIR)
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
Added Makefile target for distribution tarballs.
2017-08-13 21:05:22 +00:00
dist:
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
rm -rf "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION)"
mkdir -p "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION)/components"
Rewrite Makefile to accomodate file split
2017-09-17 15:12:44 +00:00
cp -R LICENSE Makefile README config.mk config.def.h \
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
arg.h $(SRC_DIR)/archy-slstatus.c $(COM:%=$(SRC_DIR)/%.c) $(REQ:%=$(SRC_DIR)/%.c) $(REQ:%=$(SRC_DIR)/%.h) \
archy-slstatus.1 "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION)"
tar -cf - "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION)" | gzip -c > "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION).tar.gz"
rm -rf "archy-slstatus_$(VERSION)"
Added Makefile target for distribution tarballs.
2017-08-13 21:05:22 +00:00
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
install: all
Refactor build system
2017-08-10 19:32:10 +00:00
mkdir -p "$(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/bin"
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
cp -f $(BUILD_DIR)/archy-slstatus "$(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/bin"
chmod 755 "$(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/bin/archy-slstatus"
Refactor build system
2017-08-10 19:32:10 +00:00
mkdir -p "$(DESTDIR)$(MANPREFIX)/man1"
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
cp -f archy-slstatus.1 "$(DESTDIR)$(MANPREFIX)/man1"
chmod 644 "$(DESTDIR)$(MANPREFIX)/man1/archy-slstatus.1"
what kind of weed is that?
2016-09-04 23:17:30 +00:00
uninstall:
[update] Change the binary file name from `yo-slstatus` to `archy-slstatus`
2023-05-11 19:58:06 +00:00
rm -f "$(DESTDIR)$(PREFIX)/bin/archy-slstatus"
rm -f "$(DESTDIR)$(MANPREFIX)/man1/archy-slstatus.1"
[improve] Improve the project structure
2023-05-11 02:00:44 +00:00
.PHONY: all clean dist install uninstall