[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160318173852.GD2701@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:38:52 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
patchwork-lst@...gutronix.de, Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
acme@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools lib api: respect CROSS_COMPILE for the linker
Em Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:16:23PM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:45:22PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:38:15AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf escreveu:
> > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 01:25:47PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Which is different from what the kernel does in its main Makefile:
> > # Make variables (CC, etc...)
> > AS = $(CROSS_COMPILE)as
> > LD = $(CROSS_COMPILE)ld
> > CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
> > I wonder if we could settle in one of these styles or if there is really
> > a reason to be creative :-)
> > Better, all this could go to tools/scripts/Makefile.include?
> Yeah, I agree that it would be good to come up with a common and
> consistent approach tools-wide if possible.
<SNOP>
> So 'allow-override' would probably be a good option.
Humm, my preference is to make tools/ look like the kernel, and the
kernel doesn't use that allow-override thing, right? So perhaps add what
is missing to make it look exactly like the kernel and then ditch this
allow-override thing?
What about having all this in a single place in tools/script/?
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists