Dear Aneesh V, In message <4e16ecb6.5070...@ti.com> you wrote: > > >> Without CONFIG_NORMAL_UBOOT this becomes a little cumbersome. > > > > Hm... instead of > > > > COBJS-$(CONFIG_NORMAL_UBOOT) += fileA.o > > > > we could use > > > > COBJS-$(if $(CONFIG_UBOOT_SPL_BUILD),,y) > > This is what I was trying to avoid. Isn't the above more obvious for > lay-users of make?
Yes, it is easier, but it doesn't scale. Today, for you anything that is not UBOOT_SPL_BUILD, is considered to be "NORMAL". Tomorrow, we may have additional features FOO, BAR and BAZ that need the same type of handling. So how do you intend to handle this? Assume a system that selects UBOOT_SPL_BUILD and FOO, but neither BAR nor BAZ? Versus a system that selects FOO and BAZ, but neither UBOOT_SPL_BUILD nor BAR? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: w...@denx.de A stone was placed at a ford in a river with the inscription: "When this stone is covered it is dangerous to ford here." _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot