![]() I honestly have no idea why there's so much fandom towards Make in this thread, but for me there are a few absolutely devastating problems with Makefiles:Ī) Mtimes-as-change-detection is fundamentally broken given the reality of networked file systems and. This would process any `.scss` file you dropped in `scss/` and save it in `css/`. It takes just 5 lines to teach `make` how process Sass files. Sass Make the `all` target depend on the OUT list # Define rule of how a scss to css transformation is supposed to happen # Specify a filename transformation from scss to css and convert the SRC list SRC = $(shell ls scss/*.scss 2>/dev/null) ![]() You just need 2 folders in your project, `css/` and `scss/`, and a `Makefile` to process all your Sass files into CSS. Let's take an example processing Sass CSS files. And if you use a single `Makefile` it'll detect the circular dependency and try to ignore it. If you're careful (and even if you're not), loops in your dependency graph are usually a non-issue. Recursion does not imply a circular dependency which is most people's biggest concern with Make recursion. I highly recommend you study them if you're looking to up your Make game. ![]() Here's plan9 workalike utility library, a util-linux/busybox package of binaries, a window manager, a terminal emulator, and webkit2 based web browser. IMO, the suckless guys are masters at writing deceptively complex but highly readable & concise Makefiles. To your AMI example, if you specify a dependency (or dependency chain, DAG) as a time-stamped (or set of) file, you can get make to rebuild the AME for you along with any other supporting or intermediate files. It really doesn't matter that your file is a C source file, or some unpreprocessed CSS, or a template, or an AMI. Make is about "making files." Or to be a little more semantically specific, Make is about "processes that transform files to make new files based upon their dependencies". Even the original article misses point about what Make is really about in recommending `.PHONY` targets. I don't know if you really understand Make. You can use this to build anything your heart desires, as long as you can describe it as a graph of dependencies. It still builds a DAG of the dependencies, and allows you to compose massive build systems from smaller components. Let's be honest, nobody really wants to learn Makefile syntax.Īs a shameless plug, I built a tool similar to Make and redo, but just allows you to describe everything as a set of executables. ![]() Read the article about why recursive make is harmful: ģ. If you try to break it up into multiple Makefiles, you lose all of the benefits of a single connected graph. Make is _really_ hard to use to try to compose a large build system from small re-usable steps. Sometimes you just don't want the condition to be based on mtime, but rather a deterministic hash, or something else entirely.Ģ. Using make in a CI system doesn't really work, because of the way it handles conditional building based on mtime. Remember this change is just to make it work with CUDA 9.0, I am not doing checks for version or anything, which should be done if you plan to give it to different people with different CUDA versions.Make's underlying design is great (it builds a DAG of dependencies, which allows for parallel walking of the graph), but there's a number of practical problems that make it a royal pain to use as a generic build system:ġ. How can set my CMakeLists? What's going wrong?Ĭhange in FindCUDA.cmake the nppi library to the several splitted ones. I'm using this command to compile the library: cmake Please set them or make sure they are set and tested correctly in the CMake files:Īnd then a very long list of targets like so: linked by target "opencv_cudev" in directory /home/jjros/opencv-3.3.0/modules/cudev Now I'm trying to install OpenCV 3.3.0 But i'm getting CMake Error: CMake Error: The following variables are used in this project, but they are set to NOTFOUND. I installed cuda first using cuda-repo-ubuntu-local_9.0.176-1_b. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |