* Do we really need file `all'?
@ 2008-12-30 6:17 Jike Song
2008-12-30 7:36 ` Jike Song
2008-12-30 9:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jike Song @ 2008-12-30 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sam; +Cc: linux-kbuild
Hi Sam,
In commit a680eedc6c621c75695c68198533fc3c98f4053b you introduced the
following code:
exuberant()
{
all_sources > all
all_sources | xargs ....{snip}...
This will generate a regular file named `all' in the repository, which
is not included in .gitignore.
Do we really need this file? I think the second run of all_source is
enough. Or otherwise should
we add it into .gitignore?
I'm not subscribing linux-kbuild list so please CC me in replies, thanks.
--
Thanks,
Jike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: Do we really need file `all'?
2008-12-30 6:17 Do we really need file `all'? Jike Song
@ 2008-12-30 7:36 ` Jike Song
2008-12-30 9:24 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-30 9:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jike Song @ 2008-12-30 7:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sam; +Cc: linux-kbuild
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jike Song <albcamus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> In commit a680eedc6c621c75695c68198533fc3c98f4053b you introduced the
> following code:
>
> exuberant()
> {
> all_sources > all
> all_sources | xargs ....{snip}...
>
> This will generate a regular file named `all' in the repository, which
> is not included in .gitignore.
> Do we really need this file? I think the second run of all_source is
> enough. Or otherwise should
> we add it into .gitignore?
>
> I'm not subscribing linux-kbuild list so please CC me in replies, thanks.
>
Besides, there are still some asm-{arch} under include/ now. The
current kbuild/scripts will find them by default, which seems not to
be a good idea:
$ grep "include/asm-" cscope.files |awk -F"/" '{ print $2 }'|uniq
asm-generic
asm-frv
asm-h8300
asm-m68k
asm-mn10300
asm-m32r
asm-arm
asm-xtensa
--
Thanks,
Jike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: Do we really need file `all'?
2008-12-30 7:36 ` Jike Song
@ 2008-12-30 9:24 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-30 9:28 ` Jike Song
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2008-12-30 9:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jike Song; +Cc: linux-kbuild
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 03:36:19PM +0800, Jike Song wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Jike Song <albcamus@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Sam,
> >
> > In commit a680eedc6c621c75695c68198533fc3c98f4053b you introduced the
> > following code:
> >
> > exuberant()
> > {
> > all_sources > all
> > all_sources | xargs ....{snip}...
> >
> > This will generate a regular file named `all' in the repository, which
> > is not included in .gitignore.
> > Do we really need this file? I think the second run of all_source is
> > enough. Or otherwise should
> > we add it into .gitignore?
> >
> > I'm not subscribing linux-kbuild list so please CC me in replies, thanks.
> >
>
> Besides, there are still some asm-{arch} under include/ now. The
> current kbuild/scripts will find them by default, which seems not to
> be a good idea:
>
>
> $ grep "include/asm-" cscope.files |awk -F"/" '{ print $2 }'|uniq
> asm-generic
> asm-frv
> asm-h8300
> asm-m68k
> asm-mn10300
> asm-m32r
> asm-arm
> asm-xtensa
All architectures are scehuled to move their .h files to
arch/$ARCH/include/* in this merge window.
So when this has happened we are all clear.
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Do we really need file `all'?
2008-12-30 6:17 Do we really need file `all'? Jike Song
2008-12-30 7:36 ` Jike Song
@ 2008-12-30 9:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2008-12-30 9:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jike Song; +Cc: linux-kbuild
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 02:17:26PM +0800, Jike Song wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> In commit a680eedc6c621c75695c68198533fc3c98f4053b you introduced the
> following code:
>
> exuberant()
> {
> all_sources > all
> all_sources | xargs ....{snip}...
>
> This will generate a regular file named `all' in the repository, which
> is not included in .gitignore.
> Do we really need this file? I think the second run of all_source is
> enough. Or otherwise should
> we add it into .gitignore?
>
> I'm not subscribing linux-kbuild list so please CC me in replies, thanks.
Thanks for the report. I have queued following fix:
Sam
From da20e8358e3408a208a2a7056eaff550c8644c9d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 10:20:08 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] kbuild: drop debugging leftover in tags.sh
Noticed by Jike.
Reported-by: "Jike Song" <albcamus@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
---
scripts/tags.sh | 1 -
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/scripts/tags.sh b/scripts/tags.sh
index 4e75472..9e3451d 100755
--- a/scripts/tags.sh
+++ b/scripts/tags.sh
@@ -84,7 +84,6 @@ docscope()
exuberant()
{
- all_sources > all
all_sources | xargs $1 -a \
-I __initdata,__exitdata,__acquires,__releases \
-I __read_mostly,____cacheline_aligned \
--
1.6.0.2.GIT
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-12-30 9:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-12-30 6:17 Do we really need file `all'? Jike Song
2008-12-30 7:36 ` Jike Song
2008-12-30 9:24 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-30 9:28 ` Jike Song
2008-12-30 9:22 ` Sam Ravnborg
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox