adding or removing thorns to a thorn list triggers what seems to be a full recompile

Create issue
Issue #1004 closed
Roland Haas created an issue

this seems to be due to the parameter file structures in

configs/configname/bindings/include/CParameterStructNames.h

being regenerated. At least "make -d" lists them as newer as the C source file dependency files. There seems to be only one such file for the whole configuration. My unsubstantiated guess is that this is because CParameterStructNames.h was one of the files that were excluded from dependency tracking prior to #768 (see eg line 182 of lib/make/make.config.defn.in in https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/attachment/ticket/768/NoThornIs12.patch).

Classified as minor since it is just extra careful, but try adding thorns on kraken to see just how annoying this can be :-)

I will try and see what happens if I reinstate the dependency exclusions, but input of the patch author would be helpful to understand why the exclusions were removed (I assume they should no longer be required).

Keyword:

Comments (10)

  1. Roland Haas reporter
    • changed status to open
    • removed comment

    CParameterStructNames.h seems to be the single file out of the ones that used to be excluded that still needs to be excluded.

  2. Erik Schnetter
    • removed comment

    The content of this file seems boilerplate, and it should be easy enough to split this file into one file per thorn.

    The reason why this file exists is likely that it translates between C and Fortran names; C uses structures to store parameters, while Fortran uses common blocks, and the #defines in this file implement the Fortran name mangling scheme. I assume that this file is generated by Perl code, depending on the auto-detected Fortran name mangling scheme.

    Of course, re-instating excluding this file will also work just fine, assuming it doesn't break Steve's Eclipse project.

  3. Roland Haas reporter
    • removed comment

    Second ok needed since it touches the flesh... Anyone. Please. Try this on hopper if you think this is only minor :-).

  4. Ian Hinder
    • removed comment

    I don't understand the code well enough to give a definitive "OK". If this is only a revert of a previous patch, then please apply, as this is an important issue to fix. If so, please include in the commit message the revision number of the reverted code.

  5. Roland Haas reporter
    • removed comment

    It's not a full revert. I only partially reverts the content of a single line of the commit in #768.

  6. Erik Schnetter
    • removed comment

    The original patch removed special treatment for three (or so) files, assuming that these files are not generated any more. This was wrong, and this patch reverts special treatment for one of these files.

  7. Roland Haas reporter
    • changed status to resolved
    • removed comment

    I treat Ian's comment as the second "please apply". Applied as revision 4862 of the flesh.

  8. Log in to comment