From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ns.horizon.com ([71.41.210.147]:44694 "HELO ns.horizon.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757072AbaEPKcE (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2014 06:32:04 -0400 Date: 16 May 2014 06:32:02 -0400 Message-ID: <20140516103202.11272.qmail@ns.horizon.com> From: "George Spelvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt: Improve description of lib-* targets In-Reply-To: <20140516101433.GB10187@ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: rdunlap@infradead.org, sam@ravnborg.org Cc: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux@horizon.com, mmarek@suse.cz, yann.morin.1998@free.fr >> On 05/10/2014 10:02 PM, George Spelvin wrote: >>> - For consistency, objects listed in lib-m will be included in lib.a. >>> + >>> + For consistency, objects listed in lib-m will be included >>> + in lib.a, but this will probably not do what you want. Sam Ravneborg wrote: > So maybe we should catch this and error out? Given my current poor state of knowledge, that does indeed seem like a better solution; I can't imagine a situation where the current behavior is useful. But can we not stall a straightforward and harmless documentation upgrade waiting for a more ambitious solution? A significant change to kbuild like that is going to trigger a (beneficial, but slow) wave of bug reports and Kconfig/Makefile fixes.