From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Denk Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH] fdt: Enhance dts/Makefile to be all things to all men Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 23:02:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20130529210244.C70AD3831A5@gemini.denx.de> References: <1369769778-12455-1-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org> <20130528210829.850203831A2@gemini.denx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Simon Glass Cc: u-boot-review , Devicetree Discuss , U-Boot Mailing List , Tom Warren , Tom Rini List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Dear Simon, In message you wrote: > > > I think this is not a good way to address this issue. The GCC > > documentation (section "System-specific Predefined Macros" [1]) > > desribes how this should be handled. The "correct" (TM) way to fix > > this is by adding "-ansi" or any "-std" option that requests strict > > conformance to the compiler/preprocessor command line. > > > > [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/cpp/System_002dspecific-Predefined-Macros.html#System_002dspecific-Predefined-Macros > > Stephen suggested a slightly more extreme version too - I was worried > that all the typing stuff in U-Boot headers would break in this case, > but I didn't actually test it, so perhaps it is fine. Yes, I've seen it. I think either approach is better that manually undef-ing specific variables. From my personal point of view I think the -undef approach is a bit of overkill, but I would not protest. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd-ynQEQJNshbs@public.gmane.org panic: can't find /