-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
tgt_rule changes order of dependencies #9
Comments
Thanks for reporting! Will take a look at that (I mean keeping the order). |
James Could you try this one: 4739467 Best regards |
Looks to me that it will. Hopefully I'll have time to test it tomorrow. Wondered if foreach would do it. Seeing the patch now, I feel lazy for not having already tried it before posting the issue. :)Thanks, James ---Sent from my BlackBerry Z10. From: aostruszkaSent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 04:06 PMTo: aostruszka/nonrec-makeReply To: aostruszka/nonrec-makeCc: torpescoSubject: Re: [nonrec-make] tgt_rule changes order of dependencies (#9)James Could you try this one: 4739467 Best regards —Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub. |
Now I can't reproduce the original link failure, but I can confirm that code works and leaves the dependency order intact. Thanks! |
Great! So I'm closing this one. |
I had an issue where an executable failed to link. It turned out that because a static library that is a part of the build process was specified with an absolute path, it was appearing first as a dependency due to the order of assignment to abs_deps in tgt_rule -- first absolute, then relative.
Because the static library was listed first, its functions were considered "not used" and the symbols were dropped before gcc got around to looking at the object files containing references to those functions.
As a work-around, I re-ordered to have relative dependencies listed first, then absolute.
I think an ideal solution would be to figure out how to not change the order of the dependencies... but I haven't yet had a chance to look into if that's possible and what would be involved.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: