From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 4 May 2002 12:29:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 4 May 2002 12:29:18 -0400 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([212.71.160.16]:41994 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 4 May 2002 12:29:17 -0400 Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 18:29:02 +0200 From: Tomas Szepe To: rddunlap@osdl.org Cc: Keith Owens , lkml Subject: Re: kbuild 2.5 release 2.4 Message-ID: <20020504162902.GB21542@louise.pinerecords.com> In-Reply-To: <20020504121529.GA20335@louise.pinerecords.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i X-OS: Linux/sparc 2.2.21-rc3-ext3-0.0.7a SMP (up 12 days, 10:22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > | Hmm, I don't think this analogy will do -- working with aliases involving > | fileutils as root is a way straight to hell, and hardly anyone ever walks > | it. With kbuild-2.5, however, I have to set $KBUILD_OBJTREE every time > | I want to build a kernel with objects out of the source dir -- and hey, > | is there a single person on this list who's never made a typo on the > | command line? > | > | I don't know how to properly emphasize that this *is* asking for problems, > | but still I'd be surprised if I were the only one scared by files not > | connected to the build getting erased on make mrproper. Hello, anyone? :) > > Too much policy here? > > | Would it be complicated to only kill the files the build knows it had > | created? > > That's what I would expect. Word. The purpose of all the 'clean' targets in Makefiles (distclean, mrproper, etc.) everywhere has always been to get rid of the object/ build files, and the object/build files only. Don't get me wrong, Keith, I believe kbuild 2.5's a terrific piece of code, I'm just discussing what I've found myself to be in trouble with. T.