From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 18:47:17 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] fs/iso9660: add dependencies for make source In-Reply-To: References: <1413580605-57289-1-git-send-email-kaszak@gmail.com> <54426BB5.6030903@mind.be> Message-ID: <20141018184717.229346e1@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Dear K?roly Kasza, On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 16:17:46 +0200, K?roly Kasza wrote: > > You should use $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_DEPENDENCIES) here. > > > Why? Non of the other rootfs target makefiles use that (fs/*/*.mk). All the other rootfs target makefiles use _DEPENDENCIES. Except that it's taken into account directly by the common filesystem logic in fs/common.mk. However, iso9660 is special, and therefore we handle the dependencies manually. But still, there's no need to repeat them twice. So, in your patch, change: ROOTFS_ISO9660_DEPENDENCIES = host-cdrkit host-fakeroot linux rootfs-cpio grub $(BINARIES_DIR)/rootfs.iso9660: host-cdrkit host-fakeroot linux rootfs-cpio grub To: ROOTFS_ISO9660_DEPENDENCIES = host-cdrkit host-fakeroot linux rootfs-cpio grub $(BINARIES_DIR)/rootfs.iso9660: $(ROOTFS_ISO9660_DEPENDENCIES) > Technically, the dependencies variable is already at the top, before the > first make target. Agreed. > Regarding the order: I don't really think that matters. Well, it's indeed just a subjective thing, like most coding style things. Still, when a core Buildroot contributor such as Arnout suggests coding style changes, it's usually a good idea to follow suit to get the patch merged quickly :) That being said, I agree that we don't enforce any particular order for the dependencies in the other packages. Best regards, Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com