[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151117210021.GB3818@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 16:00:21 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Support for out-of-tree build
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 02:45:58AM +0000, Petr Hosek wrote:
> This is the final solution I've converged to. It's a bigger change than the
> previous version, but the implementation is actually cleaner. In nutshell,
> I've replaced all .sub files with .mk equivalent files which are included
> from the Makefile. I'm then filtering out all C object files which have
> assembly equivalent. This allowed me to simplify the build rules while we
> still support both in-tree and out-of-tree builds. Please let me know what
> you think, I'll be happy to iterate on this.
What I had in mind was something more like a single fragment for the
arch containing something like (example on sh with 3 subarch
dimensions, where full arch with subarch is sheb-nofpu-fdpic):
%.o: sheb/%.s
$(AS_CMD)
%.o: sh-nofpu/%.s
$(AS_CMD)
%.o: sh-fdpic/%.s
$(AS_CMD)
Even better would be just an ordered list of subarch subdirs that the
top-level makefile can interpret:
SUBARCH_ASM_DIRS = sheb sh-nofpu sh-fdpic
Replacing *.sub with *.mk is not an improvement from my perspective;
rather, it's replacing N files which just contained one piece of data
(a filename) with N files each coupled with the makefile logic.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
