From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 11:40:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 11:40:53 -0500 Received: from pasmtp.tele.dk ([193.162.159.95]:18699 "EHLO pasmtp.tele.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 2 Jan 2003 11:40:51 -0500 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 17:49:14 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Christoph Hellwig , Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kai Germaschewski Subject: Re: [PATCH] more procfs bits for !CONFIG_MMU Message-ID: <20030102164914.GC956@mars.ravnborg.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Christoph Hellwig , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kai Germaschewski References: <20030102000522.A6137@lst.de> <20030101235842.A3044@infradead.org> <20030102162956.GB956@mars.ravnborg.org> <20030102173505.B11900@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030102173505.B11900@lst.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:35:05PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 05:29:56PM +0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > New Makefile: > > proc-y := proc_mmu.o > > proc-$(CONFIG_MMU) := proc_nommu.o > > > > Wouldn't this add proc_mmu.o even if CONFIG_MMU is not y? Ups, you are right. I thought about CONFIG_NOMMU.. Should read: proc-y := proc_nommu.o proc-$(CONFIG_MMU) := proc_mmu.o If CONFIG_MMU is 'y', then the first assignment is overwritten. The same principle (pattern?), but with reversed logic. But this one is not that nice, because the common case overwrite the un-common case. Sam