From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] makefiles: fixes/cleanup for building build tools
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 14:34:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091027193410.GB25942@loki.buserror.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200910261957.51597.vapier@gentoo.org>
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 07:57:50PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 26 October 2009 18:17:03 Scott Wood wrote:
> > Currently, some of the tools instead set CC to be HOSTCC in order to re-use
> > some pattern rules -- but this fails when the user overrides CC on the make
> > command line. Also, the HOSTCFLAGS in tools/Makefile are currently not
> > being used because config.mk overwrites them.
> >
> > This patch adds static pattern rules for files that have been requested to
> > be built with the native compiler using $(HOSTSRCS) and $(HOSTOBJS), and
> > converts the tools to use them.
>
> your new easylogo rule lacks HOSTLDFLAGS ...
OK, will add.
> perhaps it would make more sense to create a HOSTCOMPILE/HOSTLINK (or
> whatever) variable so this kind of thing isnt missed ?
> HOSTCOMPILE = $(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS)
> HOSTLINK = $(HOSTCOMPILE) $(HOSTLDFLAGS)
Maybe. What about PEDCFLAGS? Should that be the default for HOSTCOMPILE,
and then have a HOSTCOMPILENOPED?
> also, PEDCFLAGS seems at odds with the rest of your consistency changes.
> how about naming it HOSTCFLAGS+PED ? then you would have a new var:
> HOSTCOMPILE+PED = $(HOSTCC) $(HOSTCFLAGS+PED)
I left off the HOST for conciseness because we only use -pedantic when
building hosted stuff (and that's unlikely to change, since main u-boot code
has lower portability requirements), but I can add it if desired.
> > It restores easylogo to using the host compiler, which was broken by commit
> > 38d299c2db81bd889c601b5dfc12c4e83ef83333 (if this was an intentional
> > change, please let me know -- but it seems to be a build tool).
>
> it was intentional, but for different reasons. easylogo isnt integrated
> into the u-boot build system, so in order to compile things in there, you
> had to go into the subdir and manually run `make`. if it were integrated
> into the build system like all other tools, then converting to host tools
> is fine. but unless i missed something, it doesnt appear to be ? and
> now, going into the subdir and running `make` wont work either ...
I was expecting it to be built by adding easylogo to TOOLSUBDIRS (it would
be better if there were a distinct make target for it, but that's another
patch). Other tools such as gdb already assume they're being run in this
manner.
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-27 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-26 22:17 [U-Boot] [PATCH] makefiles: fixes/cleanup for building build tools Scott Wood
2009-10-26 23:57 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-10-27 19:34 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2009-10-28 7:27 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-10-29 16:18 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-30 8:28 ` Wolfgang Denk
2009-10-30 15:53 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-30 16:43 ` Mike Frysinger
2009-10-30 16:47 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-30 17:28 ` Mike Frysinger
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=20091027193410.GB25942@loki.buserror.net \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/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