Sam Ravnborg wrote:
make KBUILD_NOCMDDEP=1
will do what you want - at least I have it in my tree now.
I could not just ignore 'gcc' - but had to ignore the full commandline.
This is due to more complex commands like:
rm -f file; $(LD) ...
That's probably the right behaviour actually.
Within the Mak
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:03:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >There is no way to tell kbuild "ignore gcc change"
>
> There really needs to be one.
make KBUILD_NOCMDDEP=1
will do what you want - at least I have it in my tree now.
I could not just ignore 'gcc' - but had to ignore the full comm
On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:35:55AM -0500, linux-os wrote:
> >Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>1) Unconditionally execute make install assuming vmlinux is up-to-date.
> >> make modules_install run unconditionally, so this is already know
> >> practice
>
> You must never execute `make
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Bodo Eggert wrote:
Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1) Unconditionally execute make install assuming vmlinux is up-to-date.
make modules_install run unconditionally, so this is already know
practice
(o) Vote for this.
IMO, a make install should NEVER run the compil
Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Unconditionally execute make install assuming vmlinux is up-to-date.
>make modules_install run unconditionally, so this is already know
>practice
(o) Vote for this.
IMO, a make install should NEVER run the compiler.
The reason is: I'm deliber
On 2005-01-19, at 04:35, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
Matt Mackall wrote:
I would argue that "name of gcc has changed" is possibly a condition
that does more harm than good. It is just as frequently used to have
wrappers, like distcc, as it is to have different versions.
Disagree. I switch compilers all
Matt Mackall wrote:
I would argue that "name of gcc has changed" is possibly a condition
that does more harm than good. It is just as frequently used to have
wrappers, like distcc, as it is to have different versions.
Disagree. I switch compilers all the time and kbuild does the right
thing for me
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 07:35:43PM +, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> By author:Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > To give some background info about why kbuild does what it does.
> > A kernel being compiled partly with and
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> To give some background info about why kbuild does what it does.
> A kernel being compiled partly with and partly without say -regparm=3
> will result in a non-workable kernel.
>
>
Hi hpa
> >It better be difficult. You want to recompile when changing gcc.
> >Try this untested patch.
> Sorry, but that's baloney. Saying "it better be difficult" is
> equivalent to saying "kbuild is smarter than you."
To give some background info about why kbuild does what it does.
A kernel be
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:03:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I don't mind the current default, but saying I shouldn't be able to
override it is asinine.
No-one asked for it until now.
That's of course perfectly fair, and I'm not flaming you for saying that
noone had asked f
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 09:40:55PM +, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Okay, this is driving me utterly crazy...
>
> How the heck do I get kbuild to *not* think that because I'm using a
> different C compiler (including "gcc" versus "distcc"), or I'm on a
> different host, that it has to rebuild every
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
It better be difficult. You want to recompile when changing gcc.
Try this untested patch.
Sorry, but that's baloney. Saying "it better be difficult" is
equivalent to saying "kbuild is smarter than you."
I don't mind the current default, but saying I shouldn't be able to
over
On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 02:03:41PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> I don't mind the current default, but saying I shouldn't be able to
> override it is asinine.
No-one asked for it until now.
Any preferred syntax to disable this dependency check?
>
> It also means "make install" is largely unusab
Okay, this is driving me utterly crazy...
How the heck do I get kbuild to *not* think that because I'm using a
different C compiler (including "gcc" versus "distcc"), or I'm on a
different host, that it has to rebuild every single object file in my
directory? This is an unbelievable headache.
15 matches
Mail list logo
