Re: [PATCH] kselftest: replace $(RM) with rm -f command

[Darren Hart <dvhart-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:16:53AM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ----- On Sep 27, 2015, at 10:10 PM, Wang Long long.wanglong-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
> 
> > Some test's Makefile using "$(RM)" while the other's
> > using "rm -f". It is better to use one of them in all
> > tests.
> 
> I agree that this disparity appears to be unwanted. We
> should settle on one or the other.
> 
> > 
> > "rm -f" is better, because it is less magic, and everyone
> > konws what is does.
> 
> "$(RM)" is clearly defined as a Makefile implicit variable
> which defaults to "rm -f".
> Ref. https://www.gnu.org/software/make/manual/html_node/Implicit-Variables.html
> 
> Leaving it as a variable is more flexible because then the
> default behavior can be overridden if need be, which is
> not the case of a hardcoded "rm -f".
> 
> Following your line of argumentation, we should then
> invoke "gcc" directly in every Makefile because it is
> less magic than "$(CC)". This makes no sense.

I don't think they can be compared so simply. Specifying a compiler is a common
use case. Customizing the rm command is not, in my experience anyway, and like
Michael, I would definately have to look up what RM means.

That said, I care more about consistency than which is used. Both are valid, but
$(RM), while more flexible, will cost more people time to look up what it does
as it isn't commonly used than any benefit we're likely to see from its use.

Meh. :-)

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center