From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: "Andreas Färber" <andreas.faerber@web.de>
Cc: Palle Lyckegaard <palle@lyckegaard.dk>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@trasno.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Workaround --whole-archive on Solaris
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:21:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B24C01C.7050607@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <62024FDC-0214-49BF-BC69-14167AC4C034@web.de>
On 12/13/2009 01:07 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
> Certainly I would prefer having one shared linking mechanism.
>
> The three separate Makefiles (Makefile, Makefile.hw, Makefile.target)
> that govern which objects are to be compiled pose the problem.
> In the end, we need some mechanism to get the right set of objects
> into Makefile.target. Previous attempts were
> (i) writing object file paths to a file (me not satisfied), or
> (ii) printing them from within make (Avi objected), and now
> (iii) extracting them from archives (Juan objected for Linux).
Out of the three above, I prefer (ii) despite my objection.
>
> Juan, being our Makefile inventor, what about
> (iv) moving the assembling of some of the obj-y variables to a shared
> file included by all three Makefiles?
> Would that work? If we had, e.g., common-obj-y and libhw{32,64}-obj-y
> accessible in Makefile.target, we could use them for both dependency
> modelling and linking.
But out of the four, I prefer this.
In fact, why not have one large makefile, with different targets called
for different subdirectories?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-13 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-12 19:10 [Qemu-devel] Build fixes for OpenSolaris x86 hosts Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tap: Compilation fix for Solaris Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] Silence softfloat warnings on OpenSolaris Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] Workaround --whole-archive on Solaris Andreas Färber
[not found] ` <m3fx7fzz8v.fsf@neno.neno>
2009-12-12 23:07 ` [Qemu-devel] " Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 8:16 ` Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 10:21 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2009-12-13 8:02 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop --whole-archive and static libraries Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 15:40 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Quickfix for libuser.a drop Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 15:55 ` Andreas Färber
2009-12-19 17:32 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop --whole-archive and static libraries Andreas Färber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B24C01C.7050607@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=andreas.faerber@web.de \
--cc=palle@lyckegaard.dk \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@trasno.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.