From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: ltp-list@lists.sf.net
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] cgroups: conditionally enable building cgroup tests
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 18:06:46 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200907061806.47824.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <364299f40907061028o4c9c2922ma7d430f5e03f4b38@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1292 bytes --]
On Monday 06 July 2009 13:28:00 Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Francesco RUNDO wrote:
> > I've already fixed the same issue you reported. I've tested it
> > successfully.
> >
> > Subrata has already merged my patch (please, find it in attachment).
> >
> > Please, check it before to submit another patch.
>
> At the end of the day, the real problem is that we're not using the
> --with- functionality in autoconf, e.g. --with-cgroups, and instead
> we're hacking a lot of noise into Makefile's.
selectively compiling groups of code needs to be thought out before we start
throwing --with-foo options at the problem. otherwise we'll still end up with
crap, just in a different form.
> I can tell at first glance that that Makefile is a mess anyhow,
> because it's referencing _hardcoded_ /proc references and as such will
> fail to cross-compile properly if the target or the host are setup
> differently from one another, in the following two scenarios:
yes, the merged patch and that makefile suck. there should never be any
filesystem check in a Makefile anymore. while peeking in /proc is somewhat
forgivable, looking for headers never is ok. we have autoconf tests now and
Gowri's approach looks like the correct one.
-mike
[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 79 bytes --]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-06 22:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-06 10:15 [LTP] [PATCH] cgroups: conditionally enable building cgroup tests gowrishankar
2009-07-06 11:38 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-06 12:00 ` gowrishankar
2009-07-06 12:42 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-06 12:55 ` Subrata Modak
2009-07-06 13:05 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-06 17:22 ` Garrett Cooper
2009-07-06 17:28 ` Garrett Cooper
2009-07-06 22:06 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2009-07-07 6:58 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-07 14:24 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-07-08 7:40 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-07 6:53 ` Francesco RUNDO
2009-07-07 9:11 ` Garrett Cooper
2009-07-06 15:51 ` Subrata Modak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200907061806.47824.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=ltp-list@lists.sf.net \
--cc=ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox