Next: Gnulib, Up: The GNU Build System [Contents][Index]
The ubiquity of make
means that a makefile is almost the
only viable way to distribute automatic build rules for software, but
one quickly runs into its numerous limitations. Its lack of
support for automatic dependency tracking, recursive builds in
subdirectories, reliable timestamps (e.g., for network file systems), and
so on, mean that developers must painfully (and often incorrectly)
reinvent the wheel for each project. Portability is non-trivial, thanks
to the quirks of make
on many systems. On top of all this is the
manual labor required to implement the many standard targets that users
have come to expect (make install
, make distclean
,
make uninstall
, etc.). Since you are, of course, using Autoconf,
you also have to insert repetitive code in your Makefile.in to
recognize @CC@
, @CFLAGS@
, and other substitutions
provided by configure
. Into this mess steps Automake.
Automake allows you to specify your build needs in a Makefile.am file with a vastly simpler and more powerful syntax than that of a plain makefile, and then generates a portable Makefile.in for use with Autoconf. For example, the Makefile.am to build and install a simple “Hello world” program might look like:
bin_PROGRAMS = hello hello_SOURCES = hello.c
The resulting Makefile.in (~400 lines) automatically supports all
the standard targets, the substitutions provided by Autoconf, automatic
dependency tracking, VPATH
building, and so on. make
builds the hello
program, and make install
installs it
in /usr/local/bin (or whatever prefix was given to
configure
, if not /usr/local).
The benefits of Automake increase for larger packages (especially ones with subdirectories), but even for small programs the added convenience and portability can be substantial. And that’s not all...
Next: Gnulib, Up: The GNU Build System [Contents][Index]