linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tools: Use builtin $(abspath ...) instead of $(shell cd ... && pwd)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1604181609540.28036@eddie.linux-mips.org>
Date:	Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:17:26 +0100 (BST)
From:	"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
To:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: Use builtin $(abspath ...) instead of $(shell cd
 ... && pwd)

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Thierry Reding wrote:

> > > Avoid forking off a shell to resolve the absolute path of the output
> > > directory when make's builtin $(abspath ...) function will do an
> > > adequate job.
> > 
> > The abspath function is not available in make 3.80.
> 
> Do we really support make 3.80? It was released in 2002 and 3.81
> followed in April 2006. That makes it a decade old now. I'd be surprised
> if anyone was still using it to build recent kernels.
> 
> Is there a formal process for increasing the dependencies listed in
> Documentation/Changes? Should I simply make that change as part of this
> patch? Do we need broad approval?

 Hmm, what problem are you trying to solve here?  Your proposal looks to 
me like a gratuitous requirement for users to upgrade their tool (its age 
doesn't matter), which is often a burden and in any case requires extra 
time which could be used for something else.  Don't fix what ain't broke!

  Maciej