Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-25 Thread Frieder Ferlemann
Hi Patrick, Am 25.09.2010 16:16, schrieb Patrick Georgi: > Am 25.09.2010 15:53, schrieb Frieder Ferlemann: >> Maybe use a date format which is closer to ISO 8601? > How do I specify that in "__DATE__" which this thread and patch is about? Sorry that I kind of highjacked the mail thread to request

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-25 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 25.09.2010 15:53, schrieb Frieder Ferlemann: > Maybe use a date format which is closer to ISO 8601? How do I specify that in "__DATE__" which this thread and patch is about? Patrick -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-25 Thread Frieder Ferlemann
Hi, Am 25.09.2010 00:50, schrieb Peter Stuge: > Patrick Georgi wrote: >> attached patch uses the __DATE__ and __TIME__ macros instead of date(1) >> calls. User visible results are: >> - different date format (no timezone included) > > Ok. Maybe use a date format which is closer to ISO 8601? > d

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: > Am 25.09.2010 00:56, schrieb Peter Stuge: > > DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to > > expand the macro into build.h ? > While keeping all the macros that are in build.h alive? Yes. And it is the same as the previous date command I guess.. Too ugl

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 25.09.2010 00:56, schrieb Peter Stuge: > DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to > expand the macro into build.h ? While keeping all the macros that are in build.h alive? Yes. I guess, the real question is how many times these values are used in the first place. As far as

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: > >> - different time stamps in a single build > > Hm, but there's only one build.h, right? > It's evaluated on compile time, not when build.h is generated. DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to expand the macro into build.h ? //Peter -- coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 25.09.2010 00:50, schrieb Peter Stuge: >> - different time stamps in a single build > Hm, but there's only one build.h, right? It's evaluated on compile time, not when build.h is generated. -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: > attached patch uses the __DATE__ and __TIME__ macros instead of date(1) > calls. User visible results are: > - different date format (no timezone included) Ok. > - different time stamps in a single build Hm, but there's only one build.h, right? //Peter -- coreboot ma

[coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Hi, attached patch uses the __DATE__ and __TIME__ macros instead of date(1) calls. User visible results are: - different date format (no timezone included) - different time stamps in a single build - less calls to tools from make (and it also slightly helps ccache do its magic) Signed-off-by: Pat