If we change FPCMAKE to generate code like this:
---------------------
#add dir of make.exe to PATH
override PATH +=$(dir $(MAKE)) <----------------- override PATH:=$(subst \,/,$(PATH))
#$(error $(PATH))
ifeq ($(findstring ;,$(PATH)),)
inUnix=1
SEARCHPATH:=$(filter-out .,$(subst :, ,$(PATH)))
else
SEARCHPATH:=$(subst ;, ,$(PATH))
endif
PWD:=$(strip $(wildcard $(addsuffix /pwd.exe,$(SEARCHPATH))))

# if dir has backslash on the end then search fail ifeq ($(PWD),) <-------------
PWD:=$(strip $(wildcard $(addsuffix pwd.exe,$(SEARCHPATH)))) <----------- endif <---------------

ifeq ($(PWD),)
PWD:=$(strip $(wildcard $(addsuffix /pwd,$(SEARCHPATH)))) ifeq ($(PWD),)
$(error You need the GNU utils package to use this Makefile) else

---------------
then we will be able to do MAKE without change PATH in AUTOEXEC.BAT

with this command:
C:\PP\BIN\WIN32\MAKE

Darek

Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!

Thanks
Yakov

Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs!

For simple things: yes, for more complicated stuff, make is quite ideal.

Even Borland's products all come with make.

Yakov Sudeikin wrote

Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a compiler!

Not of you have hundred of files in a dozens of directories and you want to compile these source for more than one target.

The trouble I've found with fpcmake, is it's not that easy to create the make files with. Quite difficult indeed. Mind you though, I've never used any of the GNU Make utils either, eg: autoconf, etc...

cheers
James

I've presented small improve in fcpmake, witch can modified all MAKE files in FCP project, no one must use MAKE for own project but to recompile COMPILATOR better use it and with my patch even simpler (I think so).

Darek
PS. I'm sorry for my last post in HTML format.

FPC uses makefiles for the _core_ distribution for some reasons:

The primary reason is to build a sequence of packages with complex directories. More over the RTL also has dependancies within directories. (some units must be built first).

FPCMAKE is a way to keep makefile maintenance lower.

Other reasons are:

- to combine compiler processing with non-compiler processing (e.g. generate an includefile from some other file)
- to parameterise the build process (you can build full cross-snapshots with one command currently in 1.1).
- make is a fairly standard tool, and available on most platforms. FPCMAKE is only needed after alterations and while installing. This eases bootstrapping on totally foreign systems.

autoconf and automake are much more complicated, but do a lot more (interrogate the operating system about it's possbilities) So part of the "lower" parts of the RTL are configured by these tools for many platforms.

This is currently not possible for non C/C++ systems, since C headers can't 100% reliable autoconverted to Pascal. Maybe in the future if some OSes start providing the API in a more accessable format, this becomes possible.

It's only usefull for large projects.

Mind you though, I've never used any of the GNU Make utils either, eg: autoconf, etc...

I agree with the complainant to some extent... the fpcmake files are very complicated, and make itself isn't the easiest utility to use for non (l)unix'ites -that's putting it vvvv mildly!-. However, I suppose whatever we do is going to be complicated, so we have to live with it.

The main problem is when someone mods the make process (as has happened a few times recently eg re cross, re the paths to utilities), and accidentally breaks something - as is currently the case with go32v2 & win32 snapshot making under win9x (still broken!). The big problem is, because it's so complicated, that there are only only a few developers who have access to all the various operating systems/targets can who can fix it.

Regards John

On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:55:41PM +0200, Florian Klaempfl wrote: > Yakov Sudeikin wrote: > >Let's get rid of fpcmake. Pascal is good because you do not need this > >old-crap-make-utility to compile your programs! All you need is a

compiler!

FPC uses makefiles for the _core_ distribution for some reasons:

The primary reason is to build a sequence of packages with complex directories. More over the RTL also has dependancies within directories. (some units must be built first).

FPCMAKE is a way to keep makefile maintenance lower.

Other reasons are:

- to combine compiler processing with non-compiler processing (e.g. generate an includefile from some other file)
- to parameterise the build process (you can build full cross-snapshots with one command currently in 1.1).
- make is a fairly standard tool, and available on most platforms. FPCMAKE is only needed after alterations and while installing. This eases bootstrapping on totally foreign systems.

autoconf and automake are much more complicated, but do a lot more (interrogate the operating system about it's possbilities) So part of the "lower" parts of the RTL are configured by these tools for many platforms.

This is currently not possible for non C/C++ systems, since C headers can't 100% reliable autoconverted to Pascal. Maybe in the future if some OSes start providing the API in a more accessable format, this becomes possible.

fpcmake is only a helper application specially made for fpc itself. For normal pascal 'projects' that only exists of a couple of units in the same directory there is no reason to use fpcmake.

if you know a better alternative to build big projects like fpc please share it with us.

Peter

Added to fpcmake.ini

Peter