[U-Boot] [PATCH] punt unused clean/distclean targets

[Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>]

On 09/19/2011 01:54 AM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> Dear Mike Frysinger,
> 
> In message <201109190059.55664.vapier@gentoo.org> you wrote:
>>
>> if it wasn't clear in my last e-mail, i want to move in the direction of .mk 
>> files that the top level would include them and thus all the specific cruft 
>> would be kept there
> 
> Why should we do that?
> 
> Having all build rules in a single, huge Makefile does not sound like
> something that is desirable (and in this context it does not make any
> difference if the file is actually a concatenation of all these build
> rules, or if it's hidden in a set of [probably even nested] includes).
> 
> I'm still a big friend of organizing complex stuff in small,
> hierarchical structured pieces, so I have to u nderstand it only a
> small bit at a time.
> 
> Yes, running a number of nested makes may have some performance
> penalty.  But frankly: I care a ship about that when I can have the
> sofware design simpler and easier to maintain.

It's not just about build time.  Recursive make adds complexity -- you
not only need to know what you want to build, but which directory holds
the makefile.

See http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2011-September/101551.html

You also get to play the game of which variables are passed on as
variables, which are passed on as overrides, etc.

While dealing with make is never pleasant, I've found dealing with
non-recursive setups to be in general less unpleasant than dealing with
recursive make.

-Scott