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