lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [patch 1/8] extend make headers_check to detect more problems
    From
    Date
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-09-18 08:49    [W:4.270 / U:0.364 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site