From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 12:58:04 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC] Get rid of SUBARCH Message-Id: <7813eeb3-8f96-4d3d-87ec-f2a880122804@email.android.com> List-Id: References: <1377073172-3662-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Thorsten Glaser , Richard Weinberger Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mmarek@suse.cz, geert@linux-m68k.org, ralf@linux-mips.org, lethal@linux-sh.org, jdike@addtoit.com, gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net If ARCH doesn't match uname for some definition of match? Thorsten Glaser wrote: >On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> The series touches also m68k, sh, mips and unicore32. >> These architectures magically select a cross compiler if ARCH !>SUBARCH. >> Do really need that behavior? > >Not precisely that, but it=E2=80=99s very common in m68k land >to just cross-build kernels with > >$ make ARCH=3Dm68k menuconfig >$ make ARCH=3Dm68k > >Maybe a generalising of that feature, and making it >independent of SUBARCH (which can then die)? > >bye, >//mirabilos --=20 Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.