Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Ollie Lho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>Eric, >> You have modified some configuration rule form option SOME_MACRO >>to option SOME_MACRO=1. What does this do with the CPP, why did you make >>the change ?? >> > > Ollie it comes into play because we are now using the same variables > for make, CPP, and LD. > > For options on which conditional compilation depends this allows > me to say in the makefile. > > FILES-$(SOME_MACRO) := some_file.o > And to then use the value of FILES-1. > > In the Config files this comes to. > object some_file.o SOME_MACRO > > Which allows me not to put a nasty #ifdef SOME_MACRO #endif pair > around the whole file. >
There are a lot of files using this trick, for examples, rom/*_fill_infub.c. Are we going to convert all these files ?? > The solutions is still a little incomplete because I don't have > rules for setting one variable from another in the Config language > yet. But otherwise it works out fairly well. > Something like option NEED_FOLLOWING_MACROS MACRO1 (boolean op ??) MACRO2 Or why don't you just put some conditional construct in if it is really neceressary ? P.S. The current K7 cpufixup really sucks. It does not work on my MB :-(. Ollie
