From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com ([64.235.106.9]:40658 "EHLO astoria.ccjclearline.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753068AbZGVSf2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:35:28 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:32:58 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" Subject: Re: "header-y" versus "unifdef-y"? In-Reply-To: <20090722183004.GA8457@merkur.ravnborg.org> Message-ID: References: <20090722183004.GA8457@merkur.ravnborg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: kbuild devel list On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 08:25:03AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > > > is it my imagination, or did someone recently propose that there > > will soon be no distinction between those two Kbuild directives since > > it's just as easy to "unifdef" all of them, no matter what? has that > > patch already been submitted for the next major release? > > Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.txt: > > --- 7.4 unifdef-y (deprecated) > > unifdef-y is deprecated. A direct replacement is header-y. > > > That should answer your Q. ah, quite right, thanks. i remembered someone saying that would happen eventually, i didn't realize it had *already* happened. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday "Kernel Newbie Corner" column @ linux.com: http://cli.gs/WG6WYX ========================================================================