linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] kbuild: move tags support to a shell script

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2008 22:07:14 +0000
From:	Ian Campbell <ijc@...lion.org.uk>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] kbuild: move tags support to a shell script

On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 21:54 +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> 
> +# Support um (which has SUBARCH)
> +# FIXME: add support for ALLSOURCE_ARCHS if really used
> +if [ "${ARCH}" == "${SUBARCH}" ]; then
> +       archs="${ARCH} ${SUBARCH}"
> +else
> +       archs="${SRCARCH}"
> +fi

I've never used um but is this conditional backwards? If ${ARCH} ==
${SUBARCH} then archs="${ARCH} ${SUBARCH}" is equivalent to archs="
${ARCH} ${ARCH}", isn't it?

I'm not quite sure I understand the distinction between ARCH, SRCARCH
and SUBARCH either but is it expected that for ARCH=um, SUBARCH will be
i386/x86_64 or x86? I think it's the former in which case I'd expect
these days nothing will be found in arch/i386 or arch/x86_64? is a
SRCSUBARCH required?

Ian.

-- 
Ian Campbell

To do two things at once is to do neither.
		-- Publilius Syrus

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)