gnuplot-beta

bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[Petr M. <mi...@ph...>]

Somebody has added new file bin_hook.o into makefile.all. This strange file 
does just #include "binary.c". Consequently, makefiles including 
makefile.all fail to link gnuplot because of multiple definitions from 
bin_hook.o and binary.o (e.g. makefile.mgw).

Which one to remove from makefile.all? Or another action to take?

---
PM

Re: bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[Ethan A M. <merritt@u.washington.edu>]

On Saturday 10 June 2006 10:33 am, Petr Mikulik wrote:
> Somebody has added new file bin_hook.o into makefile.all. 

Huh?  It was added in 2004.

> This strange file  
> does just #include "binary.c". Consequently, makefiles including 
> makefile.all fail to link gnuplot because of multiple definitions from 
> bin_hook.o and binary.o (e.g. makefile.mgw).

According to the ChangeLog comment, bin_hook.o was supposed to replace
binary.o

> Which one to remove from makefile.all? Or another action to take?

But you are correct. That doesn't seem to be what really happened.
So far as I can tell, bin_hook is not used anywhere and should
be deleted altogether. Both the source file and the mention of it in
the Makefiles are superfluous.

Daniel:
	This was your addition, correct?  Is it really correct
that bin_hook is not referred to anywhere, in any source file?

I take it that the idea was to make inclusion of the routines in binary.o
into the final executable be conditional on BINARY_DATA_FILE.
It doesn't seem to have worked, and anyhow I don't think that is the
proper way to do it.  The Makefiles produced by ./configure should either
include binary.o, or not, depending on whether BINARY_DATA_FILE was selected.
It should not require any extra source files. 

-- 
Ethan A Merritt
Biomolecular Structure Center
University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7742

Re: bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Ethan A Merritt wrote:
> On Saturday 10 June 2006 10:33 am, Petr Mikulik wrote:
> 
>>Somebody has added new file bin_hook.o into makefile.all. 
> 
> 
> Huh?  It was added in 2004.
> 
> 
>>This strange file  
>>does just #include "binary.c". Consequently, makefiles including 
>>makefile.all fail to link gnuplot because of multiple definitions from 
>>bin_hook.o and binary.o (e.g. makefile.mgw).

Hmm, that seems like something isn't programmed correctly.  What platform is makefile.mgw, i.e., what variables are defined for the compilation you are trying?


> According to the ChangeLog comment, bin_hook.o was supposed to replace
> binary.o

Yes, well not so much replace, but be a form of conditionally including binary.c.  But it does replace binary.c in the list of

gnuplot_SOURCES = alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h bin_hook.c \
breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...


> 
>>Which one to remove from makefile.all? Or another action to take?
> 
> 
> But you are correct. That doesn't seem to be what really happened.
> So far as I can tell, bin_hook is not used anywhere and should
> be deleted altogether. Both the source file and the mention of it in
> the Makefiles are superfluous.
> 
> Daniel:
> 	This was your addition, correct?

Yes, that was from pretty far back.  I don't see how Lars' name got tied in with that.


>  Is it really correct
> that bin_hook is not referred to anywhere, in any source file?
> 
> I take it that the idea was to make inclusion of the routines in binary.o
> into the final executable be conditional on BINARY_DATA_FILE.

Yes, the reason for this hook is that binary.c is needed for two programs, that special C program to generate binary data and gnuplot in the case BINARY_DATA_FILE is not active.  When BINARY_DATA_FILE is active, from what I recall, a few extra lines of code achieved what the code in binary.c does.

The reason for the hook is that binary.c must be present for the bf_test.c program that generates binary data.  From the Makefile.am:

bf_test_SOURCES = bf_test.c binary.c binary.h alloc.c

so we can't put any type of defined conditional around the code inside binary.c, i.e., bf_test.c always needs it.  Hence, this bin_hook.c accomplishes the defined conditional for gnuplot while leaving the code compiled in binary.o for bf_test.

> It doesn't seem to have worked, and anyhow I don't think that is the
> proper way to do it.

There may be a better way.  I didn't put too much effort into a better method because I hoped that eventually gnuplot wouldn't need the code inside binary.c anymore, in which case binary.c could be dedicated simply to the C program for creating binary files (bf_test), and bin_hook.c would get the heav-ho from gnuplot_SOURCES.

>  The Makefiles produced by ./configure should either
> include binary.o, or not, depending on whether BINARY_DATA_FILE was selected.
> It should not require any extra source files.

I suppose the best thing is that based upon BINARY_DATA_FILE in ./configure, the file binary.c would or wouldn't be present in the list where bin_hook.c is.  That is:

gnuplot_SOURCES = alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h bin_hook.c \
breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...

becomes

gnuplot_SOURCES = alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h binary.c \
breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...

or

gnuplot_SOURCES = alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h \
breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...

whichever is appropriate.  I don't know how to do that in configure.

Dan

Re: bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[<tim...@en...>]

Daniel J Sebald wrote:
> I suppose the best thing is that based upon BINARY_DATA_FILE in=20
> ./configure, the file binary.c would or wouldn't be present in the=20
> list where bin_hook.c is. That is:
> gnuplot_SOURCES =3D alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h bin_hook.c=
 \
> breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...
>
> becomes
>
> gnuplot_SOURCES =3D alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h binary.c \
> breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...
>
> or
>
> gnuplot_SOURCES =3D alloc.c alloc.h ansichek.h axis.c axis.h \
> breaders.c breaders.h bitmap.c bitmap.h color.c color.h command.c \...
>
> whichever is appropriate.  I don't know how to do that in configure.
>  =20
You add in configure.in, just after the "if test=20
"$enable_binary_data_file" =3D yes ... fi" code :

   AM_CONDITIONAL(BUILD_BINARY_C, test "$enable_binary_data_file" =3D yes=
)

And in src/Makefile.am, you add :

    if BUILD_BINARY_C
        gnuplot_SOURCES +=3D binary.c
    endif
 =20
This is (one of) the standard way(s) to do conditional compilation=20
according to the autotools doc.

Timoth=E9e

Re: bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...>]

Timoth=E9e Lecomte wrote:

> You add in configure.in, just after the "if test=20
> "$enable_binary_data_file" =3D yes ... fi" code :
>=20
>   AM_CONDITIONAL(BUILD_BINARY_C, test "$enable_binary_data_file" =3D ye=
s)
>=20
> And in src/Makefile.am, you add :
>=20
>    if BUILD_BINARY_C
>        gnuplot_SOURCES +=3D binary.c
>    endif
> =20
> This is (one of) the standard way(s) to do conditional compilation=20
> according to the autotools doc.

A-ha!  Thank you...

Patch on SourceForge to rid bin_hook.c.

Dan

Re: bin_hook.o and binary.o in makefile.all

[<br...@ph...>]

Petr Mikulik wrote:
> Somebody has added new file bin_hook.o into makefile.all. 

"Somebody" was actually Lars Hecking (--> "cvs annotate" helps to find 
out such things), or, to be more precise, Lars just checked in what the 
automatic mechanism in src/Makefile.maint generates.

This is one of those pitfalls that tend to show up only when we gear up 
for a release cycle --- auto-maintenance techniques never used in 
between releases suddenly turn out to need maintenance of their own.