Re: [Mesa3d-dev] plan for new makefile system

[Felix <fx...@gm...>]

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:35:03 -0700
Brian Paul <bri...@tu...> wrote:

> Felix K=FChling wrote:
> > Wow, your makefile system managed to nearly hang my system. The default
> > shell that is installed as /bin/sh on my box is "dash" which does not
> > seem to have pushd and popd. Therefore the recursive make calls end up
> > in the same directory and cause an endless recursion, filling up system
> > memory pretty quickly.
> >=20
> > Is there a reason why you use pushd/popd instead of plain cd or
> > "make -C"?  If you really have to use it you should make sure that it is
> > executed in bash. At least in GNU make you could set the SHELL variable
> > to /bin/bash (or just bash, assuming that it's somewhere in the PATH)
> > for that purpose.
>=20
> I'm not a shell expert, so please bear with me.

Neither am I. Sometimes I am surprised by weird behaviour because many
people assume that /bin/sh is in fact bash. dash is perfectly compatible
with original Unix shell and more light-weight than bash. So it's good
for shell scripts that don't need bash extensions. If they do then they
should state that explicitly (e.g. #!/bin/bash).

In (GNU) make you can choose the shell to use for executing the rules'
commands by setting the SHELL variable.

>=20
> I don't think make -C is a standard feature of most makes (IRIX's make=20
> doesn't support it, for example).

I understand.

>=20
> I thought pushd/popd was pretty much supported everywhere.  Guess I'm=20
> wrong.  I'll change the loops to something like this:
>=20
> for dir in $(SUBDIRS) ; do \
> 	if [ -d $$dir ] ; then \
> 		(cd $$dir; make) ; \
> 	fi \
> done
>=20
>=20
> I think that'll work just as well as pushd/popd.

Yes, this looks safe. ;-)

>=20
> -Brian
>=20

Thanks,
  Felix