Re: test10-pre7

[Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>]

Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
> > LINK_FIRST is processed in the order it is specified, so a.o will be
> > linked before z.o when both are present.  See the patch.
> 
> So why don't you do the same thing for obj-y, then?
> 
> Why can't you do
> 
> 	LINK_FIRST=$(obj-y)
> 
> and be done with it?

Hmm, so why don't we just call it obj-y and be done with it? ;)

Since someone kindly enlightened me that LINK_FIRST was unsorted, I'm finding
it very hard to grasp what the difference is between an unsorted LINK_FIRST
and unsorted LINK_LAST list, and an unsorted obj-y list.  From what I
understand, obj-y = $(LINK_FIRST) $(LINK_LAST) ?

Therefore, there is little difference between:

LINK_FIRST = a.o z.o
LINK_LAST = y.o p.o

and

obj-y = a.o z.o y.o p.o

I still don't see what LINK_FIRST and LINK_LAST gains us, other than
potentially more confusion.  Instead of having one order-dependent
variable, we now have 2.  Please enlighten me further!
   _____
  |_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
  |   |         Russell King        rmk@arm.linux.org.uk      --- ---
  | | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html   /  /  |
  | +-+-+                                                     --- -+-
  /   |               THE developer of ARM Linux              |+| /|\
 /  | | |                                                     ---  |
    +-+-+ -------------------------------------------------  /\\\  |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/