Re: [Plplot-devel] automatic dependencies

[Geoffrey F. <fu...@ga...>]

Hi Alan,

Thanks for the prompt usage report.

Alan W. Irwin writes:
 > gcc -c          -O    -I. -I/home/software/java/jdk1.2.2//include -I/home/software/java/jdk1.2.2//include/linux -I/usr/include/tcl8.3 -I/usr/include/tcl8.3/itcl-private/generic -I/usr/include/gtk-1.2 -I/usr/include/glib-1.2 -I/usr/lib/glib/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include/gnome-1.0 -I/usr/lib/gnome-libs/include -I/usr/include/orbit-1.0 -MD -MF .d.pdfutils -MP -c pdfutils.c -o pdfutils.o
 > gcc: cannot specify -o with -c or -S and multiple compilations
 > make[1]: *** [pdfutils.o] Error 1
 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/software/plplot_cvs/HEAD/plplot/tmp'
 > make: *** [all] Error 2
 > 
 > For your convenience here is a wrapped version of that gcc line
 > 
 > gcc -c          -O
 > -I. -I/home/software/java/jdk1.2.2//include
 > -I/home/software/java/jdk1.2.2//include/linux
 > -I/usr/include/tcl8.3
 > -I/usr/include/tcl8.3/itcl-private/generic
 > -I/usr/include/gtk-1.2
 > -I/usr/include/glib-1.2
 > -I/usr/lib/glib/include
 > -I/usr/X11R6/include
 > -I/usr/include/gnome-1.0
 > -I/usr/lib/gnome-libs/include
 > -I/usr/include/orbit-1.0
 > -MD -MF .d.pdfutils -MP -c pdfutils.c -o pdfutils.o
 > 
 > On my system the gcc version is as follows:
 > gcc -dumpversion
 > 2.95.4

?!?!  What the heck is 2.95.4?  Never heard of it.  And the release
page at gcc.gnu.org makes no mention of it.  Must be another Linux
dist vendor inventing gcc releases again like Red Hat did when they
christened a daily gcc snapshot "2.96" and started the whole debacle. 

Could you do me a favor and paste that line into your system, and try
editing it to find out what makes the error message go away?  Is the
problem the -M* options, or is it the multiple -c options, or is it
just the use of the -o (which would totally floor me).

 > The working compile I did yesterday with the old plplot didn't have the
 > "-MD -MF .d.pdfutils -MP -c" part of the command so I assume it is
 > some aspect of that string of parameters that is causing the
 > problem for my gcc version 2.95.4.
 > 
 > As you alluded to in your message the configuration seems to be adding these
 > gcc-3.0 parameters to the gcc command line when my system only has 2.95.4.

Mmm.  Sorry.  Could you look in lib_sh_linux.in near the top, where
the with_gcc3 business is, and telll me if you see how the shell code
is coming up with the wrong answer there?  When I try to duplicate the
stuff that's in $(shell ...) on my own xterm, it comes up with the
right answer, so I can't see how it would be getting it wrong inside make.  

Shell drives me bonkers.

-- 
Geoffrey Furnish         fu...@ga...