Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 1/8] extend make headers_check to detect more problems | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:45:36 +0100 |
| |
On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 08:21 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Can't we do this with a hdrchk$$$ filename to avoid using > random entropy for each compile?
I'd like to move to a scheme where we do headers_install and headers_check _without_ starting with a rm -rf $(HDR_INSTALL_PATH)/include.
We could probably do it by adding a rule along the lines of $(filter-out $(unifdef-y) $(header-y),$(wildcard $(INSTALL_HDR_PATH)/$(dst)/*.h): rm $@ ... i.e. remove every .h file from the destination directory except the ones we just created.
Then we can make $(INSTALL_HDR_PATH)/$(dst)/%.h depend on $(srctree)/$(src)/%.h so that it doesn't get re-exported unless it's changed. And we can keep a stamp file around (or the output of the test compilation after Arnd's patch) which shows that the _check_ step has been done too. Something like .checked.%.h
After we do that, a second invocation of 'make headers_check' should have nothing to do, which will encourage people to keep using it.
-- dwmw2
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |