Il 02/07/2012 23:17, Alexander Graf ha scritto: >>> No, plain "e500.o" won't work no matter where you put it in the >>> makefile (unless you add more global prefix setting). I think >>> he's suggesting that the plan is to eventually migrate to >>> everything specifying its full path, though I don't see why. > > Why wouldn't "e500.o" in hw/ppc/Makefile.objs work? I'd hope we > traverse the target specific path first, no?
Not sure about the question... the idea is to abolish vpath and rely only on the path to the current Makefile.objs file. So, e500.o in hw/ppc/Makefile.objs, after the addsuffix would compile to hw/ppc/e500.o e500.o in hw/ppc/Makefile.objs, before the addsuffix would compile to hw/ppc/../e500.o aka hw/e500.o e500.o in hw/Makefile.objs would compile to hw/e500.o There is no conflict between hw/e500.o and hw/ppc/e500.o, but of course if you specify hw/e500.o twice (one normally, one via hw/ppc/..) you get duplicate definitions. Paolo
