From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: "Andreas Färber" <andreas.faerber@web.de>
Cc: Palle Lyckegaard <palle@lyckegaard.dk>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@trasno.org>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/3] Workaround --whole-archive on Solaris
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:21:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B24C01C.7050607@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <62024FDC-0214-49BF-BC69-14167AC4C034@web.de>
On 12/13/2009 01:07 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
> Certainly I would prefer having one shared linking mechanism.
>
> The three separate Makefiles (Makefile, Makefile.hw, Makefile.target)
> that govern which objects are to be compiled pose the problem.
> In the end, we need some mechanism to get the right set of objects
> into Makefile.target. Previous attempts were
> (i) writing object file paths to a file (me not satisfied), or
> (ii) printing them from within make (Avi objected), and now
> (iii) extracting them from archives (Juan objected for Linux).
Out of the three above, I prefer (ii) despite my objection.
>
> Juan, being our Makefile inventor, what about
> (iv) moving the assembling of some of the obj-y variables to a shared
> file included by all three Makefiles?
> Would that work? If we had, e.g., common-obj-y and libhw{32,64}-obj-y
> accessible in Makefile.target, we could use them for both dependency
> modelling and linking.
But out of the four, I prefer this.
In fact, why not have one large makefile, with different targets called
for different subdirectories?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-13 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-12 19:10 [Qemu-devel] Build fixes for OpenSolaris x86 hosts Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] tap: Compilation fix for Solaris Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/3] Silence softfloat warnings on OpenSolaris Andreas Färber
2009-12-12 19:10 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] Workaround --whole-archive on Solaris Andreas Färber
[not found] ` <m3fx7fzz8v.fsf@neno.neno>
2009-12-12 23:07 ` [Qemu-devel] " Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 8:16 ` Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 10:21 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2009-12-13 8:02 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop --whole-archive and static libraries Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 15:40 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Quickfix for libuser.a drop Andreas Färber
2009-12-13 15:55 ` Andreas Färber
2009-12-19 17:32 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Drop --whole-archive and static libraries Andreas Färber
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=4B24C01C.7050607@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=andreas.faerber@web.de \
--cc=palle@lyckegaard.dk \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@trasno.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).