How to properly 'make' a latex project?

latexmk is the answer you are looking for.

LaTeX is notoriously difficult to "get right" using a Makefile, because it might take multiple compiler passes - updating e.g. .aux files - to get the finished results. Getting this right in a general Makefile (as opposed to one tailored to a specific document) is very hard, which is why there are pre-made solutions. Of these, latexmk comes included with your average LaTeX distribution, which is why I consider it first choice.

The trick is to provide a Makefile rule for every custom step x-to-TeX (or x-to-PDF or whatever) you might have, and having latexmk figure out all the LaTeX-related stuff while relying on the Makefile for the rest (via -use-make).

# You want latexmk to *always* run, because make does not have all the info. # Also, include non-file targets in .PHONY so they are run regardless of any # file of the given name existing. .PHONY: MyDoc.pdf all clean # The first rule in a Makefile is the one executed by default ("make"). It # should always be the "all" rule, so that "make" and "make all" are identical. all: MyDoc.pdf # CUSTOM BUILD RULES # In case you didn't know, '$@' is a variable holding the name of the target, # and '$<' is a variable holding the (first) dependency of a rule. # "raw2tex" and "dat2tex" are just placeholders for whatever custom steps # you might have. %.tex: %.raw ./raw2tex $< > $@ %.tex: %.dat ./dat2tex $< > $@ # MAIN LATEXMK RULE # -pdf tells latexmk to generate PDF directly (instead of DVI). # -pdflatex="" tells latexmk to call a specific backend with specific options. # -use-make tells latexmk to call make for generating missing files. # -interaction=nonstopmode keeps the pdflatex backend from stopping at a # missing file reference and interactively asking you for an alternative. MyDoc.pdf: MyDoc.tex latexmk -pdf -pdflatex="pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode" -use-make MyDoc.tex clean: latexmk -CA 

This setup works flawlessly for anything referenced via \include.

However, \include might not be appropriate in every case. For one, it is not nestable (i.e. an \included file may not \include another). It also adds an automatic \clearpage to your document, i.e. \included content starts a new page. It also has advantages, like resulting in shorter re-build times if contents are modified, but sometimes you need nesting, or the referenced file's contents should be embedded in a page.

You need \input for this.

Sadly, \input breaks the build. If pdflatex encounters a missing \input file, it generates an error (instead of a warning like with \include), and stops compiling. Yes, latexmk will generate the file and re-start pdflatex, but this is inefficient, and breaks completely if you have multiple such file references, because eventually the compile will end with a "too many re-runs" message.

John Collins' answer to a question by me regarding this problem provides a workaround:

\newcommand\inputfile[1]{% \InputIfFileExists{#1}{}{\typeout{No file #1.}}% } 

This macro generates a warning instead of the error of a straight \input, and allows latexmk to generate all missing files in the first pass.

Note: A rule with the generic target %.pdf: %.tex gives you trouble once you start using \includeonly in your document, for reasons internal and complex. That's why I used a specific rule instead of a generic one.

There is actually one alternative to latexmk that I can also recommend. In case you are looking at a more involved project setup, you might consider CMake, for which Kenneth Moreland has done the excellent UseLATEX.cmake module.

This, however, is a bit too involved to give a how-to in the scope of this answer.