David Woodhouse wrote:
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 10:56 +0100, Oleg Verych wrote:
I saw that. My point is pure text processing. But as it seems doing
`make` is a lot more fun than to do `sh` `sed`.
The problem is that it _isn't_ pure text processing. There's more to
building with --combine
You can do this without changin the Makefile, if you provide suitable
scripts on $PATH for the make.
I want to add here whole issue of kbuild's way of dependency
calculation and rebuild technique.
1) This whole infrastructure is needed only for developers. But
developer while writing/updating
On Fri, 13 June 2008 14:10:29 -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
Maybe I should just be grateful for any ccache hits I get.
ccache's usefulness depends on your workload. If you make a change to
include/linux/fs.h, close to 100% of the kernel is rebuilt, with or
without ccache. But when you revert that
On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 10:56 +0100, Oleg Verych wrote:
I saw that. My point is pure text processing. But as it seems doing
`make` is a lot more fun than to do `sh` `sed`.
The problem is that it _isn't_ pure text processing. There's more to
building with --combine than that, and we really do
Tim Bird @ Fri, 13 Jun 2008 12:06:05 -0700:
I'm running an automated test which does numerous compiles
of the Linux kernel. One of the things I do is create a localversion
file at the root of the kernel source tree with a unique identifier
that I use later on in testing.
And what kinds of
Oleg Verych wrote:
And what kinds of source/kconfig changes are made for every build?
I start with a baseline config for an embedded board, then
alter, one at a time, individual config items related to kernel size.
No source changes are made.
I do full removal of the kernel source tree and
And what kinds of source/kconfig changes are made for every build?
I start with a baseline config for an embedded board, then
alter, one at a time, individual config items related to kernel size.
No source changes are made.
Using same `gcc -E` principle, I once had a dream to create
build
